Designations for community managers who want to enhance their careers
Rohingya Reply in Response to Berlin Khin Maung Saw
In response to Berlin Khin Maung Saw’s 16 pages
Tags: in , to , 16 , response , Khin , Maung , Berlin , Saw’s , pages Posted by ibrahim from media on 08/04/2009 at 11:04 PM in History of Arakan / Burma Anti- Rohingya provocative Article! Written by Mohiuddin (aka)Maung Sein [ Identification of an ethnicity is the right of a group of people who share common heritage, language, culture and history, living in a defined territory as a compact community for a countable period of time. No one or authority can impose their criteria, their Litmus test upon them by force or decree. The Muslim population of Arakan who believe they are native people of Rohang /Mrohang (Rohingya name of Rakhapura/Rakhaing Prey) identify themselves today as the Rohingyas per their free will and aspiration. They want to be known by this name by others with due respect. It is their natural and basic right to live in peace and harmony with sister communities of Burma as loyal and worthy citizens of the soil of Arakan. There is nothing to interfere about or to discredit the Rohingyas with other names that they disapprove of by any third party or other national races including the Rakhaings. The ethnic identity name should not and cannot be a factor at all when determining the nationality or citizenship status in Burma]. For Burmese people, in general, and the Rohingyas, in particular, struggle for democracy and human rights have been a long and seemingly unending walk to freedom.. The symbol of our suffering is embodied in the fragile body of Aung San Sui Kyi. Her suffering is shared by her people and the international community. Even though she suffers in silence, Burma’s democracy movement leaders have developed the framework for a democratic institution building with the objective of establishing a democratic civil society that is based on human rights, justice, equality and peaceful co-existence for achieving peace and prosperity in Burma. The goal of restoration of democracy in Burma is reflected in the policies and strategies of the NLD (National League for Democracy), the party which won landslide victory in the 1990 general election, the CRPP (Committee Representing the Peoples’ Parliament) and all other opposition democratic forces – inside and outside of Burma, including those who are engaged to remove the military rule by armed resistance of the patriotic revolutionary forces of various ethnic minorities fighting for justice and the right of self-determination in Burma . In the past, we had a democratic government for a brief period. But it didn’t survive. The question before us now is not only how to walk to freedom but also how to sustain it. There is no easy solution to this vital question. For this, in the Arakan context, we need academic debates, research, seminars, symposium, dialogues and conferences that are open and inclusive, not only just within each community but also between communities through active participation in a friendly and engaging atmosphere. This is particularly true about discussions on Burmese democracy and the Rohingya question. Why? This is simply because of the fact that the struggle for restoration of Democracy in Burma is a complicated, multi-dimensional phenomenon. A genuine democratic movement simply cannot afford to be oblivious of the genuine rights and concerns of the various communities that live within its border. We have to assess the internal and external agents and mechanisms of change, understanding the cultural diversities of people with whom Rohingyas would interact as the co-citizens inside the Arakan and Burma. Bottom line: we have to develop an all inclusive, integrated and coordinated approach.
From the dismal record of democracy inside Burma, it is obvious
that the concept of democracy and its benefits, allowing her people to
enjoy human rights in social infrastructure development has not sunk in
very well among her people. It is mainly because they are being
bombarded with xenophobic propaganda fed by the long-serving military
machine and its agents working as divisive forces that only help to
strengthen and prolong military rule in Burma. Education along these
lines, e.g., the deadly effects of xenophobia, is very important. Such
humane education will strengthen the foundation for a multi-ethnic,
multi-racial, and multi-religious Burma that we can all pride in. For
harvesting the fruit of democracy, as is obvious, such an education must
begin with the leaders of the democracy movement. It is really
praise-worthy and a matter of great pride for many of us to see the
positive effect of that humane education amongst the students of the
1988-generation and the leaders of the Burmese democratic forces under
the leadership of popular democracy icon Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her
NLD party. Yet, it is so disheartening to see today how prejudice and
xenophobic thinking are keeping Burma backward. Democracy is a
government by the people in which the supreme power is vested in the
people and exercised directly by them or by their elected
representatives. According to Abraham Lincoln, democracy is a government
“of the people, by the people and for the people.” Democracy is not
just a slogan. It is about living and bringing to fruition those lofty
high ideals in the life of a nation so that the genuine concerns and
legitimate aspirations of all its people, majority and minority –
irrespective of their social and economic status within the society,
ethnicity, color, race and religion – are met so that no one either
feels discriminated or abused. In short, democracy is the
institutionalization of freedom. It guarantees sovereignty of the people
through a government that is based upon the consent of the governed,
protecting minority rights, guaranteeing basic human rights and equality
before the law, imposing constitutional limits on government,
instilling social, economic and political pluralism, values of
tolerance, pragmatism, cooperation and compromise for greater good of
all. These are the essential ingredients of a democratic state. In
Burma, ‘democracy’ is a far cry! It is missing. In this context, when we
discuss about the problems and prospects of democratic development in
Burma we see a naked and unambiguous disregard for basic fundamental
human rights of their sister communities. This is noticeable in
prejudicial, racist and hostile attitude of various communities towards
each other. This is particularly true in certain ethnic group’s hostile
attitudes towards the Burmese Muslims and the minority Rohingya people
of Arakan that are part of the mosaic of estimated 54 million people
that comprise today’s Burma. It is a matter of great concern that most
of the Rakhaings from Arakan ruling group, elites and intellectuals
alike, openly deny the existence of Rohingya in Burma on racial
prejudice, labeling them ‘illegal Bangladeshi immigrants’ and
‘non-nationals’ of Burma. Their hostile attitude mimics those of the
military (SPDC) regime that likes ethnic conflicts and turmoil to
persist and flare up in the western region of Burma. Nevertheless, it is
comforting to know that except for the bigoted ultra-nationalists, most
Rakhines are not anti-Rohingya. Racial, ethnic and religious prejudice
runs so deep in Burma that it is not so surprising to see hesitation on
the part of some Burmese democratic parties to accepting and cooperating
with the Rohingyas as fellow comrades in joint struggle for freedom,
democracy and human rights in Burma. Fortunately again, except for a
small group of misunderstood, misinformed or deluded individuals, not
all Burmese democratic activists are anti-Rohingya. These are symptoms
of Burma’s obstacle to democracy. Such anti-democratic thinking is
against the concept of pluralism and multi-racial society. These are
challenges to the values of tolerance and the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
Amongst the exiled Rakhine/Burmese leadership, lamentably,
democratic parties like the ANC (Arakan National Council, formed by
Rakhaing – exiles in India), ENC (Ethnic Nationalities Council, formed
by exiles of many ethnic groups in Thailand), ALD (Arakan League for
Democracy, the party that participated in the 1990 general election in
Arakan winning 11 MP seats) also do not recognize Rohingya as an ethnic
minority of Burma. Their attitude is not conducive towards development
of genuine democracy in Burma. In such a hopeless, truth-defying
political landscape of doom and gloom, hatred and prejudice, when
someone’s suffering is seen as other’s benefit, it is refreshing to
recall that the genuine leadership of 1988 Generation students – ABSDF –
came in support of the Rohingya people with due recognition of and
respect for them. They embraced the Rohingya on broad-based political
and democratic platform during and after Rohingya refugee exodus to
Bangladesh. The ABSDF published a 22-page booklet in support of the
Rohingyas. In a nutshell, on racial and religious grounds, most of the
Burmese ‘democrats’, except a few Burmese exiled groups and some
Rakhaing individuals, knowingly or unknowingly refrain from or hesitate
to accept the Rohingyas in their ranks and files. This type of
chauvinistic, hostile and morally reprehensible attitude is no different
than those preached and practiced by the BSPP/SLORC/SPDC military
rulers against the Rohingyas. It is simply strengthening the hands and
policies of the SPDC military junta and its tools of oppression for
dividing the people of Burma along racial, ethnic and religious lines.
Such an attitude of exclusion, as exhibited by many of so-called
democratic leaders of Burma, is neither the way of democratic thinking
nor does help thawing the BurmeseRakhine-Rohingya relationship.
Suspicion and hatred of Rohingyas on racial and religious ground, and
depriving them of their fundamental rights to survival as human beings
with honor and dignity in their ancestral homeland is a crime against
humanity. It is at variance with the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. Those who want to exclude the Rohingyas in the mainstream
democratic forces of Burma, particularly the Rakhaing democrats, raise
the pretext that there is no ethnic group in Burma by the name of
‘Rohingya’. They claim that the Rohingyas are ‘illegal Bangalee
(Bengali)’ people who entered Arakan during the British colonial period
from 1824 to 1948 and, as such, they are not one of the nationals of
Burma at all, but ‘foreigner residents’ and ‘stateless’ people. In order
to refute such malicious claims, I provide below the following
facts:[1]
1. In the Burmese transliteration of the 8th century
Anandasanda Stone Pillar inscription in the ancient capital city of
Mrauk-U, the use of Rohingya words like Arakandesh (Arakan country),
Raza (king), kam (job), etc., testify to the rich cultural heritage of
the Rohingya people in Arakan. [Dr. Saw Tun Aung: Shittaung Phara Stone
Pillar's Northern Side Inscription, Rakhine Welfare Association's 25th
Anniversary Magazine, pp. 48-53]
2. Dr. Than Tun, the rector of Mandalay University and professor
of history wrote, “The kings of Arakan had Muslim titles. The Muslim
kings mentioned in the Kyaukza (stone plates or stones tablets
inscriptions of 1442)[2] might be Rohingyas from the Mayu valley of the
eastern Naf River (and the western Kaladan River) who claimed their
existence of over thousand years. Their existence might be from the time
of 1202 C.E. when their coreligious Muslims conquered Bengal, that is
800 years [ago]. It was written in the Kyaukza of 1442 that there were
some Muslim kings of Arakan who were very friendly with the kings of
Ava.” [Dr. G.H. Luce, "K’yan (Chin)" Mru and K’umi (N. Arakan)" Phases
of Pre-Pagan Burma Languages and History, Oxford, SOAS, 1985-76-97; Dr.
Than Tun, Kalya Magazine, pp. 27-28, 1994, August]
3. The British-Burma Gazetteers of 1879 stated: “Many Arab ships
wrecked near Rambree Island of Arakan coast during the reign of
Mahataing Sanda (788-810) and the crews and the traders of those ships
were Muslims and
they were sent to the Arakan proper and settled in villages,
where the married local women.. … According to history, Islam came
through the sea borne Sufis and merchants. These were testified by the
darghas (shrines) which are dotted at the long coast of Arakan and
Burma.” [p. 16]
4. The historian U Kyi wrote: “The superior morality of those
devout Muslims attracted large number of people towards Islam who
embraced it en masse.” [The Essential History of Burma by U Kyi, p. 160]
5. Zaya Kyaw Tin U Ba Shin wrote, “From 1430 A.D. Arakan was ruled by the Muslims.” [The Arrival of Islam in Burma, p. 5]
6. Francis Buchanan was a surgeon in 1795 to the British
Embassy in Ava, the then capital of Burma. He wrote, “I shall now add
three dialects, spoken in the Burma Empire. The first is that spoken by
the Mohammedans, who have long been settled in Arakan and who call
themselves Roanigya or native of Arakan.” [The Languages of Burma,
Asiatic Researches (Calcutta), vol. 5, 1801]
7. The Time Atlas of the World History says, “Muslim kingdom of
Arakan was independent in the 14th and 15th centuries.” [Time Atlas of
the World History, edited in 1979 by Geoffrey Barraclough, p. 33]
8. The SLORC /SPDC Publication ‘Thasana Yongwa Htoonkazepo’
stated, “Muslims arrived and settled since last 1000 to 1200 years in
Burma.” [The SLORC Publication 'Thasana Yongwa Htoonkazepo’ p. 65]
9. According to the 1947 Constitution of the Union of Burma,
based on Aung San-Atlee agreement, “Every person who was born in any of
the territories which at the time of his birth was included within His
Britannic Majesty’s dominions and who has resided in any of the
territories included within the Union for a period of not less than
eight years in the ten years immediately preceding the date of the
commencement of this Constitution or immediately preceding the 1st
January 1942 and who intends to reside permanently there in and who
signifies his election of citizenship of the Union in the manner and
within the time prescribed by law, shall be a citizen of the Union.
(Section 11, iv) Furthermore, the Constitution’s Citizenship Section 10
says, “There shall be but one citizenship throughout the Union.”[3]
10. The Union Citizenship Act, 1948 says: “Any person descended
from ancestors who for two generations at least have all made any of the
territories included within the Union their permanent home and whose
parents and himself were born in any of such territories shall be deemed
to be a citizen of the Union.” (Article 4.2)[4]
11. The First President of the Union of Burma U Sao Shwe Thaik
acknowledged and announced that Rohingyas are an indigenous race and
citizens of Burma, same as Shan, Kachin, Mon, Karen, and Rakhine.
12. Under the 1949 Residents of Burma Registration Act and the
1951 Residents of Burma Registration Rules, Rohingyas were issued
Burmese NRC (National Registration Cards), which itself is a proof of
their bona-fide citizenship and nationality since foreigners were
excluded from the issuance of such cards. [The issuance of the NRC to
Rohingyas was stopped by Ne Win military regime after 1962.]
13. The Registration of Foreigners Act (Burma Act VII, 1940)[5]
did not require Rohingyas to be registered as foreigners, since they
were regarded as Burmese nationals.[6]
14. The former Prime Minister U Nu made categorical statements
concerning the Rohingya status. On September 25, 1954 at 8:00 p.m., U Nu
made speech from the Burmese national Radio BBS (Burmese Broadcasting
Services) stating, “The Rakhine State is situated towards the south-west
of the Union. The Buthidaung and Maung Daw townships are included in
the Sittwe Division of the Rakhine state. These two townships are
bordering East
Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The majority of the people in these two townships are Rohingyas who profess the Islamic faith.”
15. The former Burmese Defence Minister and Prime Minister U Ba
Swe said at mass rallies at Buthidaung and Maung Daw on the 3rd and 4th
of November, 1959 that “The Rohingyas are equal in every way with other
minority races like the Shan, Chin, Kachin, Kayin, Kayah, Mon and
Rakhine. They have lived in Myanmar Niang Ngan for ages, according to
historical facts. They are of the Islamic faith. There is historical
evidence that they have lived faithfully and harmoniously with other
races of the Union.”
16. In his speech, Brigadier U Aung Gyi, Vice Chief of Staff at
Maung Daw on July 4, 1961 at the ceremony of the resistance group who
were fighting in the name of revolution since the independence of Burma
stated that “Rohingyas are an indigenous race in Burma same as other
ethnic groups such as Shan, Kachin, Karen, Mon and Rakhine.”
17. In recognition of the Rohingya as an indigenous ethnic
minority, the Dean of Student Affairs, University of Rangoon, granted
permission to organize and operate under the name of “University
Rohingya Students Association” in 1959-61. [Note: foreign students could
not organize under the Burmese Universities Act.]
18. The Parliamentary Democratic Government of U Nu allowed the
broadcast of the Rohingya language program from May 15, 1961 to October
1, 1965 as per indigenous citizen’s program of BBS.
19. U Nu’s democratic government granted local autonomy to the
Rohingyas and declared establishment of the Mayu Frontier Administration
(MFA), a special frontier district ruled directly by the central
government in the year 1961, May 30, which was abolished in 1964, on
February 1, by Gen. Ne Win. [It is worth mentioning here that initially,
General Ne Win recognized the Rohingyas as an indigenous race and
citizen of Burma. (Dr. Shwe Lu Maung, The Price of Silence)]
20. The Encyclopedia Burmanica, published by the government in
its Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 89-90, publication mentioned “Rohingya as an
indigenous ethnic group living in northern Arakan.”
21. Rohingya Minister, MPs, Secretaries were given due honor and
appropriate posts in the both the Houses of the Parliamentary
Democratic Government in Burma from 1948 to 1962.
22. Rohingyas were recruited in army, navy and police forces as
loyal Burmese citizens to defend the country and people of Burma from
1948 to 1962.
23. Rohingya political, social, educational, cultural
organizations were duly recognized and approved by the proper
Authorities for registration.
24. Rohingya ethnic cultural show was exhibited on the occasion of national parade of the National and Independence days.
25. The high school textbook on geography (1978) published by
the Ministry of Education, Government of Burma, showed minority
settlements in North Arakan where Rohingya people lived.
26. As Bona-fide citizens of Burma, the Rohingyas exercised
their citizenship rights of votes and contested in all parliamentary
general elections, held in Burma since 1936, including those in 1939,
1947, 1952, 1956, 1961, 1974, 1978 and 1990, and wining elections in
their region. The participation in those elections, along with the
assignment of the post of Health Minister in U Nu’s Cabinet further
consolidate the indigenous status of Rohingyas and their citizenship or
Burmese nationality.
27. The conspiracy to rob the Rohingyas of their inalienable
fundamental rights of citizenship or Burmese nationality rights was
initiated by the Ne Win’s Revolutionary Council at the persuasion of
some Rakhaing ultranationalist and elite groups. [Dr. Aye Kyaw (now a US
citizen) was one of the leaders of this group. He has written
anti-Rohingya literary materials to misguide the Burmese people and
military officers.] In site of such conspiratorial and xenophobic 1974
and 1982 citizenship laws – that were formulated by the BSPP/SLORC/SPDC
rulers, they did not dare to bar the Rohingyas from exercising their
rights to vote in Burma in the 1990 general election.
28. Burma Election commission and Immigration Departments
recognized the Rohingyas as Bona-fide citizens by preparing the voter
lists and granting and approving nominations of Rohingya candidates in
the Multi-Party Democracy General Election of 1990. [In that election,
the National Democratic Party for Human Rights (NDPHR) of the Rohingya
ethnic people contested in 6 townships - Maungdaw, Buthidaung, Akyab
(Sittwe), Mrauk U (formerly Mro-haung), Minbya and Kyauktaw in 9
constituencies and won 4 MP seats. The elected MPs were - U Kyaw Min
(aka) Mohammad Shamsul Anwarul Hoque from Buthidaung Constituency (1), U
Tin Maung (aka) Nur Ahmed from Buthidaung Constituency (2), U Ebrahim
(aka) U Chit Lwin from Maungdaw Constituency (1) and U Fazal Ahmed from
Maungdaw Constituency (2).] The approval of 9 electoral nominations from
the NDPHR and other Rohingya candidates from other parties (e.g., Mayu
Development Student Youth Organization (Arakan), led by U Kyaw Soe Aung
and U Emtiyaz; National Ethnic Reformation Party led by U Khin Maung and
U Shwe Bung Win, Amyothar (National) Party led by Rtd. Major-General
(air) U Tun Kyaw Oo and Rohingyas, Indigenous Cooperation Party led by U
Hussain Ahamed and U Fazal Kabir (alias) U Kyaw Thein in Arakan by the
Burma Election Commission clearly shows that Rohingyas are not
foreigners – they are neither guest citizens nor associate citizens.
Otherwise those nominations would have been rejected on the basis of
1982 citizenship law. 29. The historian Moshe Yegar writes, “The
Rohingyas preserved their own heritages from the impact of the Buddhist
environment not only as far as their religion is concerned but also in
some aspects of their culture.” [The Muslims of Burma: A Study of a
Minority Group, p. 25]
It should be pointed out that in spite of their religious ties
with Bengali Muslims, especially in the neighboring Chittagong area
(Bangladesh), Rohingyas maintained certain distinctness from them. 1.
Anthony Irwin writes, “The Musulman Arakanese, generally known as
Bengalis or Chittagonians, quite incorrectly…. To look at, they are
quite unlike any other product of India or Burma that I have seen. They
resemble the Arabs in name, in dress and in habit. The women and more
particularly the young girls have distinctive Arab touch about them…. As
a race they have been here over two hundred years.” [Burmese Outpost,
pub. Collins (London), 1945, p. 22] 2. The historian Moshe Yegar writes,
“There is after all very little common – except common religion –
between the Rohingyas of Arakan and the Indian Muslims of Rangoon or
Burmese Muslims of the Shwebo district. These are different groups that
do not identify with each other, do not share the same goal and
aspiration.” [The Muslims of Burma: A Study of a Minority Group, p. 111]
3. U Thein Pei Myint, one of the most popular Burmese authors, writes,
“Almost all Bengalis grow moustaches, Rohingyas do not keep moustaches.
Wedding programs, marriage arrangements, feeding customs, foods and
drinks are all different. Instrumental music, musical instruments and
music, etc. are different. Hereditary festivities of boat-racing, paddy
transplant competition, wrestling, riddles, bull-fight, buffalo-fight,
etc., are held as Rohingya’s own traditional festivities. The culture of
‘collective labour volunteering’ exists among the Rohingya till today.
Difference is more vivid in trade and profession. Haircutting,
blacksmith, goldsmith, silversmith, laundry
and shoe-making are very rare among the Rohingya as they
conceive these are lowly and inglorious professions.” [From Myohaung to
Paletwa, 1978 Ahte’tan Pinjin Zagabjei Le’jwei:zin (A high school
Burmese textbook) An oft-repeated argument by the Burmese chauvinists
and Rakhine ultra-nationalists is that Muslims of Northern Arakan state
participated, voted and became MPs in all general elections from 1937 to
1990 as Muslims and not as a Rohingyas.[7] I say: so, what? Are we not
the same people? The British government recorded us along the religious
line as Muslims. The Burmese government did not accept registration of
political party bearing the name Rohingya during the political party
registration process in 1989. Such government branding did not change
what we are. We are the same people. One must understand that ethnicity,
indigenous or tribal status is not a factor or obstacle in the way of
citizenship and nationality of Burma. One should be reminded here by the
statement of General Aung San, the Father of our nation. Sixty years
ago, during Panglong Meeting, in 11 February 1947, he said: “We have in
Burma many indigenous peoples: the Karen, the Kachin, the Shan, the
Chin, the Burmans and others… In other countries too there are many
indigenous peoples, many “races.”… Thus “races” do not have rigid
boundaries. Religion is no barrier either, for it is a matter of
individual conscience… If we want the nation to prosper, we must pool
our resources, manpower, wealth, skills and work together. … If we are
divided, the Karen, the Shan, the Kachin, the Chin, the Burman, the Mon
and the Arakanese, each pulling in a different direction, the Union will
be torn, and we will come to grief. Let us unite and work together.”
When asked about the Rohingyas and human rights, the Democracy icon Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi replied in recent BBC interview: “Democracy does mean
pluralism and democracy means equal basic human rights for everybody. I
am confident that we can build up a really strong and united Burma. The
signs are all here. In some ways, the sufferings we have undergone
together have built up a tremendous feeling of trust among each other.
Our sufferings have united us. I think the world has opened up in such a
way that different cultures are able to reach across to each other. We
all live in the same country – we have lived in the same country for
centuries and because we have lived together so closely, we have had our
problems. You have more problems with your neighbours than with people
who live very far away from you – that’s only natural. But I think we
can also learn to be very, very good neighbours in the same way because
we all live in this country we can learn to be very good and loving
towards each other. We can learn to trust each other, we can learn to
work together, we can learn to live together and I think that learning
process has already begun.” (Daw Aung San Suu Kyi on Rohingyas in BBC
interview) From the speeches of Burma’s Founding Father General Aung San
to his daughter, hope of future Burma, Democracy icon Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi all members of national races and democrats from Burma should
understand that there is no place for racism and ethnic prejudice in a
future democratic Burma. Identification of an ethnicity is the right of a
group of people who share common heritage, language, culture and
history, living in a defined territory as a compact community for a
countable period of time. No one or authority can impose their criteria,
their Litmus test upon them by force or decree. The Muslim population
of Arakan who believe they are native people of Rohang /Mrohang
(Rohingya name of Rakhapura/Rakhaing Prey) identify themselves today as
the Rohingyas per their free will and aspiration. They want to be known
by this name by others with due respect.. It is their natural and basic
right to live in peace and harmony with sister communities of Burma as
loyal and worthy citizens of the soil of Arakan. There is nothing to
interfere about or to discredit the Rohingyas with other names that they
disapprove of by any third party or other national races including the
Rakhaings. The name should not and cannot be a factor at all when
determining the nationality or citizenship status.
Further evidences to Rohingya’s ancestry in Arakan are
documented in the writings of famous historians like Hall, Harvey and
Professor Desai who mentioned that the population of Arakan before the
10th century CE was of Indian stock, i.e., similar to Bengalis in
Bangladesh today. As we know, over the last millennium, many of these
Bengalis became Muslims. Similarly, many of the original inhabitants of
Arakan that looked like their neighbors in today’s Bangladesh also
became Muslims. They identify themselves as the Rohingyas. It is also
known that foreign trade of Arakan before the Portuguese arrival in the
late 15th century was solely in the hands of Arabs and that there were
many Arab colonies in Kyauk-La-Ga and Mrauk-U, the then capitals of
Arakan. Due to the presence of these colonies and the ensuing
intercourse of Arabs, many natives Arakanese became Muslims (The Muslims
of Burma: A Study of a Minority Group by Moshe Yegar). The most shining
dynasty of Arakan was the Mrauk-U dynasty. It was founded by Naramikla
(alias) Sulaiman (1403—1433 CE), who had lived in exile for more than
two decades. He took military help from the Bengal Muslim King to
restore his kingdom. From King Naramikla to Sandathudama in 1652 CE more
than 15 Arakanese kings adopted Muslim titles and used coins bearing
Muslim inscription. Even their judicial system was based along Muslim
line. Many ministers, high-ranking officials, members of army were
Muslims. Descendents of these Muslims commingled with former native
people comprising today’s Rohingyas. (The History of Chittagong, Vol. 1
by Dr. S. B. Kunango, University of Chittagong) There were thousand of
captive Muslim settlements in Arakan during Mrauk-U dynasty. Magh
(Atrakanese Buddhist) pirates and Portuguese slave hunters brought these
captives to Arakan on a regular basis. According to Arthur Phayre, this
population consisted of 15% of total population of Arakan.. (Travelogue
of Father Manrique) Arakan history is replete with the fact that during
the dispute between Moghul Prince Shah Shuja, who took asylum in Arakan
and Arakan king Sandathudama, in the early 1660s, Prince Shuja found a
considerable number of Muslims to take side with him. The British
Official Mr. Paton’s Report in 1825 categorized the population of Arakan
as 6:3:1, i.e., 60,000 Arakanese Buddhists, 30,000Arakanese Muslims,
and 10,000 Burmans. This report shows that when the Great Britain
occupied Arakan, there was 1 Muslim living there for every two Arakanese
Buddhists. (A. C. Banarjee, The Eastern Frontier of British India,
Calcutta, 1964, p. 351) Towards our ancestral origin to Arakan, let me
now submit some historic edifices of Rohingyas:
(a) The Sandi Khan Mosque in Minthaya Bying Village (Kawalong),
Mrauk-U, was built by the Muslim Army that restored Narameikhla to the
throne of Arakan in 1433. This mosque was partially destroyed by the
SLORC (current the SPDC).
(b) The Musa Mosque, popularly known as the Maiz-zya Pal-lee, with its big pond in the eastern Mrauk-U in 151315.
(c) The Rakhine Ja-may Mosque at Shwe Daung village in Moulmein
was built by the Muslim Army of Arakan during Arakanese King Min Raza
Gri’s time (1593-1612).
(d) The Alam Lashkar Mosque with its ten ponds around it in Pan Myaung Village in Minbya township of Arakan.
(e) The Shwe Dah Kazi Mosque, which was built by Shwe Dah Kazi
before 1780. [Note: Kazi died in Calcutta Jail after arrest during the
First Anglo-Burma War, fighting against the British Occupation Forces in
Minbra Township of Arakan.] The Kazi Mosque in Paik Thay Village is in
Kyauktaw township of Arakan.
(f) The Bodor Mokam Mosque — built in the 18th century.. This is presently occupied as a military Cantonment.
(g) The Musa Dewan Mosque at Nazirpara, near the Muslim graveyard in Akyab.
(h) There was another mosque known as Nan-Oo Pal-lee in front of
the old Palace in Mrauk-U, which was totally demolished by the SLORC,
all in defiance of the 1972 UNESCO Convention.]
(i) All the settlements of Rohingyas in Arakan are located along
the most important and fertile rivers of Arakan such as Meyu, Kaladan,
Lae Myo, which testify to the fact that Rohingya settlements in Arakan
are as old as history; hence, as one of the first settlers to the land,
they could occupy the fertile areas of Arakan.
(j) There are many other proofs and evidences of Rohingyas’
ancestry and settlement in Arakan that I could have cited. However these
are beyond the scope of discussion here.
As has been amply demonstrated above, Rohingyas are indigenous
to Arakan. The anti-Rohingya campaign to deny their birthrights to the
land of Arakan is wrong – both factually and morally. It is deceitful,
malicious and hostile to the core. It must be stressed further that the
1974 and 1982 Burma Citizenship Laws are products of unelected,
usurping, dictatorial military junta that had neither the mandate to
pass any law on the citizenship of Burmese multi-ethnic people nor the
legitimacy to hold national convention to draw a new constitution for
the legalization of the rule of the military dictatorship. These laws
are illegal and unacceptable to the people of Burma including the
affected Rohingyas of Arakan. Above all, these discriminatory laws are
at odds with scores of charters and laws governing citizenship around
the world. They vehemently undermine the human rights of the Rohingyas
and at the same time have been posing a big impediment in the promotion
of democracy not just within Arakan but in the entire Union of Burma.
Apart from such exclusionary racial and religious prejudices against
minorities, factors that contribute to unease, suspicion, tension and
hatred in a reminiscent of the Belfast scenario of the yesteryears,
there is a plethora of factors that are also challenging to the
democratic development in Burma. There are many inside Burma, from the
SPDC military junta to selfish pro-junta business tycoons, who fear to
lose power and fortune if democracy were to be established in Burma.
Then, there are outside powers like China, India and Russia that benefit
from trade and commerce with the military-run Burma. Shamelessly, they
care less about genuine aspirations of the people inside Burma.
Democracy is about equality and rights, respect for dignity and
sovereignty of people. Double standard is antithesis to democracy;
playing racial or religious favoritism with a dominant group and
oppressing a minority is not democracy. The human rights violations
faced by the Rohingyas include not only the denial of citizenship, but
also forced labor, extortion by the members of law enforcing agencies
(Nasaka), rape, abduction, severe restrictions on job, education, health
and human services, movement and marriage, and practice of religion and
culture – all signifying a total, abysmal absence of basic human
rights. By any account, the Rohingya community is the worst victim of
targeted harassment, torture and persecution. If democracy movement
leaders of Burma fail to face the challenges of inter-ethnic conflicts,
human rights violation, xenophobia, intolerance, extremism, racism and
increasing inequalities, such problems will continue to pose significant
threats to peace and stability of Burma. They will not foster
democracy, but secession or rebellion
with every national/ethnic community trying to walk out of the
Federation. They can also be, as has already been proven in the last
century through the influx of Rohingya refugees to Bangladesh,
destabilizing forces in South and South-east Asia. The word ‘democracy’
cannot remain confined within slogans only. Understandably, if democracy
awareness campaign is not undertaken during the course of democratic
movement in Burma today, and if we do not bring these important but
neglected issues to the attention of the fellow countrymen and the
leading democrats, and fail to come up with honorable solutions that
unite us all (from Rohingya to Rakhine, Shan to Mon to Burman to Karen,
etc.) on an equal basis, I am afraid, even if today’s SPDC were to leave
letting Burma celebrate democracy, our victory will be superficial and
very short-lived. It won’t be too long that Burma became a failed
democracy with a revisit of the brutal military rule. Burmese democrats
and educationists must, therefore, play a very progressive role in
combating intolerance and racism. They must promote dialogue,
understanding and respect of various communities that make up today’s
Burma to bring about the much-needed changes in thought and actions
within multi-ethnic institutional framework. In this endeavor, the
present democratic leadership can exchange information, and discuss
areas of concern, and, most importantly, initiate reconciliation at all
levels of policy- and decision- making within and between rank and file
of all groups and parties. The road to a future stable, peaceful and
progressive Burma lies in mutual trust and respect between leaders and
their followers and constituents. In accordance with the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, all members of the progressive Burmese
democratic forces need to agree and accept that all individuals of Burma
– born there (including those born of refugee parents outside),
regardless of their ethnic or social background, religion or state of
residence – are bona fide Citizens of Burma and must have the same basic
human and democratic rights. They must demand a cessation of all
hostilities and human rights violations against all minorities.. They
cannot afford to be unmindful of the sufferings of all the communities
that make the fabric of today’s Burma. This type of thinking will
energize all minorities fostering a united movement for democracy inside
Burma. It will aid in conflict management and resolution of the
critical issues dealing with the Rohingyas and other minorities in
Burma. It will also be a stabilizing force to sustain democracy. Let’s
all work for that goal. For further information Please contact:Mohiuddin
(aka)Maung Sein, Tel: President Rohingya Concern International (RCI) PO
Box-567,NY-14213,USA 1-646-625-9407
[About the Author: Mr. Maung Sein (alias) Mohiuddin Yusof is a
human-rights activist. He served as the President of NDPHR (exile) USA
from 2005 to 2008. He was also the Diplomatic Representative of ALD -
exile-(Arakan League for Democracy) and ex-Coordinator of ALD-Liaison
Office (Malaysia), one of the founding members and Chief Coordinator of
Arakan Democratic Forces (ADF - Malaysia) under the leadership of Dr.
Shwe Lu Maung (alias) Shahnawaz Khan (1997-1999), ex-Chairman and a
founding member of the Organization of Displaced Rohingya Muslims (ODRM –
Malaysia) in 1993-1999, Convener and ex- president of Arakan Peoples’
Freedom Party (APFP) in 1990, Ex-President of Rohingya Human Rights
Organization (RHRO) in 1988, Ex-Vice President of
Rohingya Muslim Welfare Association (RMWA) in 1987, former
Secretary and EC member of Muslim Salvation Party (Tanzeem Khuddamul
Musleemin) in 1973 - 1978. Mr. Mohiuddin was also the chief Coordinator
of the Organizing Committee of the First International Conference in
Japan on the Problems of Democratic Development in Burma and the
Rohingya people. He now lives in New York City, USA. Mr. Mohiuddin is
originally from Mrauk-Oo (formerly known as Mro-haung). He is the
grand-son of U Shormuluk from Mrauk-U Township, where his family lived
for hundreds of years in Mrauk-U until moving recently to Akyab
(Sittwe). His lineage is from the aristocratic family of U Shormuluk in
Mrauk–U who were the custodians of the ancient Sindi Khan Mosque (built
in 1433) for more than 200 years. The historical mosque was demolished
by extremist and ultra-nationalist Rakhaings under the aegis of
SLORC/SPDC brutal military forces. His grand-father was also the
Custodian of Nenn Oo Palli (Palace Mosque) of Alay-zay (Mrauk-U, ancient
capital city of Arakan Kingdom), which was also demolished by
anti-Muslim forces.]
——————————————————————————-
[1] For more details, see the article: “Rohingyas are not
British Era Settlers: Summary of the Facts – From the Rohingyas of
Arakan” by A.F.K. Jilani, 6 October 2006 , http://www.rohingya.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=61. [2] Stone Plate Inscription” serial No. 963/20-23-804
[3] For details, see The Price of Silence by Dr. Shwe Lu Maung, DewDrop, USA (2005), p. 228-231; http://www.blc-burma.org/html/Constitution/1947..html#CITIZENSHIP.
[4] http://www..ibiblio.org/obl/docs/UNION_CITIZENSHIP_ACT-1948.htm
[5] http://www..blc-burma.org/html/Burma%20Code/lr_e_bc01_11.html
[6] It is worth noting that the Immigration Department of
Arakan State keeps a diligent record of foreigners within the state.
According to a report issued by Arakan Security and Administration
Committee, only 1037 individuals were registered as foreigners in 1974.
The Rohingyas did not belong in the list.
[7] The practice of registering Muslim population along the
religious line rather than ethnic or racial line owes it to the British
administrative policy, something that can also be seen in Sri Lanka ,
when registering the Tamil Muslim minority as only “Muslims.” The same
practice was adopted by the British when recording the Rohingya Muslim
population in Burma .
Credit:
No comments:
Post a Comment