Talk on Rakhine Issue: Discussion on Finding Solutions


(Continued from yesterday)

Moderator: As moderator may I mention the very important topic. All three of us are researchers and scholars. What we discussed today on the topic of the Bengali people or Rohingya, history is just of us. These facts do not reflect official opinion of the directorate, Myawaddy Media Group, the Tatmadaw and the Ministry of Defence on the topic of the name Rohingya as U Ko Ko Hlaing has explained. As some people in Myanmar we didn’t have the word Rohingya until 1978/79, because it was the very strange word but even the world has never heard of the word. That word was very popular only after 1990 when I noticed. Dr Leider has mentioned about it. It has some truths that the term Rohingya has been politically labelled about that the ethnic problem is politicized internationally.

Dr Jacques P. Leider: I just wanted to find the word. It is often presented like Rakhine people totally reject and don’t know this word. I would like to quote Simon Martin from Sittway who is a very well-known author in Rakhine State. One of his publications mentioned after the Second World War, there was a word once called Rwanja. But that was refused locally. Nobody ever said that was controversial and did not exist. But the fact that there was different spelling that you see in 1950. It may be. I am going to the local scholar woman you mentioned and I didn’t put it into the discussions. But the fact that the term pops up in 1950 you have different spellings. Apparently, it was never written. So maybe it knows well. It is all about this interpretation that it takes. What I regret is that I have been coming to the country for many years before 2012 and after 2012. It became like nuclear. It likes something so dangerous you don’t want to touch and actually I have been talking with Rakhine people for many years about this issue. About that was poorly known outside. I just actually wanted to put up the word in front of the audience. Thank you.

Moderator: Shall we go on the next topic that is the root causes of the conflict.

U Ko Ko Hlaing: The next topic I would like to point out the root causes of the conflict. Rakhine issue is very complicated and it involves so many causes. So this is just too precise such a cause about the six main facts I think. First and foremost, historical and colonial legacy and also this is historical cause, geographical cause and geographical demographic factors. Generally, international scholars and international media they don’t want to elaborate those realities. We cannot run away from those realities. We are in situations of geopolitics. Even in the IT age of the world, the famous book “Revenge of the geography”, you may have read. Since the geography says the matters in the politics. And also, because of our internal situations how the frontier area we cannot manage effectively since the time of independence. That is weak administration since the frontier area that was the domestic situations. So, underlying factors is under development in economic arena and also the many impacts of the domestic and international politics in this issue. Finally, friction in the world was chosen by extremists those are complicated in this issue. In my mind, so this one historical and colonial legacy I have mentioned since early days. During the colonial era Myanmar became British-India at the beginning and then after 1930s British-Burma. So, India and Burma at the time were the same colony, the same country with no border like Schengen Area in EU. You don’t need any passport or any documents. And there was labour demand in Rakhine State. Very cheap labour from Bengal both Hindus and Muslims came into those areas as seasonal workers. So that was a demographic pressure in those areas, especially in the northern Rakhine State that caused clashes between different civilizations and different societies. May be like the clash of civilizations. And it has impact on socio-economic life. I think those were the initiating factors. So everybody may know the 1942 massacre at the beginning of the World War II. British Raj wanted to use local loyal people in Myanmar, local loyal people for British Raj. The minority nationalities such as Christian Karens and also the Indians or the South Asian people as their loyal servants in their administration and their home staff. So they used those people to resist the invading Japanese imperial army and in covert operations. They gave them rifles and arms and ammunitions to resist Japanese. In Buthidaung and Maungtaw areas in Rakhine region those South Asian Indian people rather than attacking the Japanese army, targeted the local people, the Rakhine natives. Tens of thousands of Rakhine people were killed at the time in 1942. That started the history of hatred and animosity between societies. I don’t blame to both societies. This is the cause. We cannot deny the facts. After that, the relations between native Rakhines and Bengali settlers worsened after the Second World War. And after the independence the new born Burmese government was facing serious internal insurgency. It was even dubbed the Yangon government. The thing is that only downtown Yangon was safe. You could not go beyond eight miles. Even Kungyan , Kawmu on the other side of the Yangon River was under Communist (Red Flag). There were battles in Insein. So the government and the Tatmadaw could not take care of the Rakhine situation very well. The administration was weak in frontier areas. In geopolitics, the theory of frontier areas is important. The scholars might know that frontier areas are prone to conflicts. Because of that fact the instability and weak administration was quite natural that underdevelopment overwhelmed in those regions, creating a vicious circle. So this is the real situation what had happened in Rakhine State. I won’t blame anyone. This is the cause and effect that is the universal rule. So we need to stop the causes of the problems. We need to know the real facts about this issue. So we can tackle it. You can see demographic challenge. There was rapid influx of the migrants and also high population growth rate without any population control. You can see in this photo a simple family with 35 members. So even in the colonial times, the population growth rate of the Bengali settlers is tremendously fast. I can show you this record made by deputy commissioner Mr R B Smart of Akyab district. Because of its very large volume, I cannot show you in my PowerPoint. But I can show you some of its pages, I think are very important. Thank you for your patience. And I would like to show you if I have a chance. You can see every detail of the Akyab district at the time is recorded. They are very detailed. You can see a very comprehensive picture of the time, including the pagoda. You can see now the population records from 1891 to 1911. And you can see populations of the races. Mohammedans were only 58,000 in 1872. In 1911 their population became more than 178,000. Within 40 years, three times increase in their population. What he said about is that Arakanese were gradually being put out of Arakan before the steady wave of Chittagonian migrations into the area from the west even at the time in 1911 and the Mohammedans whose number was 150,000 by the year 1911 rose to 170,000. Many of them were men who came in only during the working season from Chittagong and were included in the census, but could not properly speak the local language. You can see R B Smart described the people of a very small group were recorded. You can also see hill tribes, but you cannot found any word relating to Rohingya in this gazetteer. So even since 1911, British colonial officials warned the extinction of Rakhine people because of the population pressure coming in from the west. Now you see the involvement of the international powers and nonstate actors. In 2013, one of the Bangladesh newspapers stated about the greater Bangladesh comprising of Bangladesh and Arakan, and also Indian states of Assam and Manipur and Nuricia. After I read this news I reported it to my boss at that time was the President. We should be cautious about the news. There may be some movement like that the Mohammedan movement at the time of our independence. I have been warning the country about that case since 2013. The government took action, forming a state-level committee and an agency to deter it. It is a very difficult task to protect 100 percent. I think that we need to consider the time constraints. It’s just the tip of the iceberg of the root cause. Thank you. Moderator: As a moderator I would like to say some few words to all the attendees including military attaches. This is the first time that Myanmar scholars and researchers have the chance to open up to the world the real situation of Myanmar. Nobody has ever done anything so for on the Rohingya issue or the Bengali issue as openly as right now. This will be a vision for our elaborate explanation and our deep research. Thank you again for the patience. Please understand that this is the first time that we break the ice to open up the world and we want the world to listen to our side of the story.

Dr Jacques P. Leider: I want to say a few words about 1942. This is a topic that no historian has really deeply investigated. You know, to use a modern word that was really what happened according to the word ethnic cleansing. This is also a very good example to see that this is not black and white. This is not just like the good against the bad. This is the two communities that were hit. Now I remember a few years ago during the presentation of Mr Tony Blair in Bangkok advising on peace and the society he was sharing his example and his experiences of Northern Ireland conflict. He said you were talking to hostile parties and you tried to find something that they shared. And then he said like everybody had a problem with the unemployment, and he said he started with talking on both sides about this. Now, I am a historian and I often wondered you know is there something that the people there have to share. So in 1942 they both shared the terrible experience but they were telling in each group their own story about how many people suffered. I have been very reluctant I must say to correct anything about because there is no primary source. No CNN, no BBC, no Aljazeera with the camera to follow like what went on. The resentment and the despair about what had happened remained with the community. I think I am talking to two sides about this event. Whatsoever, I think it is also a starting point to think back the second point I would like to make as regards to what we just heard looking back at history in the colonial period. I am particularly thinking about 1950s. Nowadays, when people make comments about this they refer to legal texts and regulations. And they would say this should have been done and this has the wide sense, so on. I made the observation that the country came out of the WWII in very difficult time. I don’t need to tell you what kind of a bad start. It needed time to build up the bureaucracy. The Ministry of Immigration if you might remember started in 1957-58. That means like ten years after independence you know the bureaucracy was still building up the administrative infrastructures. So we might account at least not for excuse but at least to understand the weakness and not easy later on to say this should have been done and to play the blame game. I just wanted to put these remarks within what we are discussing today here and openly go into this. And that’s also born in mind that some of the topics that are hot iron today like the citizenship issue. That wasn’t really a big topic in the 1950s. Race and religion were not the hot topics as they are today. You might recall U Kyaw Myint, the great leader of Rakhine cause, in 1950s and the parliament calling for the creation of the Arakan State. And he clearly said we had no problem with the Muslims. I mean he was the leader of Rakhine at that time and was very famous. So, we sometimes have to bear in mind that back even in those days like 50, 60 or 70 years ago the way that the discussions were running back and forth really different from what we see now. I think this is a little bit you can call this a lesson of the history but also I would say a call for some legacy for someone might simply find the argument as a warning for them today. Thank you.

Moderator: Now we will go to the next topic citizenship and migration.

Dr Jacques P. Leider: About the topic of migration is something for historians. It’s a topic that every time I would like to call for one hour or two hours to explain the backdrop. When you are looking back at history of Rakhine but are looking back at the Bay of Bengal. You see that the history of this area has made up of people moving north and south moving back and forth. You cannot explain Rakhine history in that area without taking into account that people had been migrating and sometimes we need to explain this again and again. This is a zone where Southeast Asia is touching South Asia a culturally mixed area and also a friction and potentially confrontation. But migration is a part of history of that area. Let me get into details. It is quite clear that at the moment Pakistan in 1947 and Myanmar in 1948 were born out of the British colonial empire. This would all change those people and we just heard U Ko Ko Hlaing mentioning openness of this area during over 140 years. I think this area when talking about migration those looking from the perspectives of Pakistan, East Pakistan (Bangladesh), and looking from the Myanmar side have not been a priority. I mean within Myanmar we know there were many things, many issues that the country was confronting with the maintenance of its unity. And this area wasn’t always a priority and that might also contribute to the fact that many of the issues have been like hanging on over the decades and not being dealt with as they should have been clearly when we start to make now comparisons with other countries. And this is the point that sometimes I regret that in Myanmar may be the media, the newspapers or other speakers trying to present the national Myanmar point of view do not sufficiently insist on comparison. Because there is much to be said about the situation in Myanmar, and that is also true in other places of the world simply people were not be aware of the issue of migration is really a global topic. This is not something that you can discuss only with regard to just one country and there is only one truth as it is a very complex issue. These issues are discussed all over the world and sometimes we may get some understanding for the situation if we can refer to complaints and issues that appear in many other places of the world. Again that is not an excuse. Sometimes people compare and one gets the feelings they want to get you away from your responsibility. I mean that is not what we should do but at least people should try to balance sometimes their appreciation and I think that is what is meant while we are having this talk show today like to broaden the approach of these issues. Many of these issues are shared and should also be clearly expressed and put into a wider complex. I as a foreigner am not in the place to make this criticism. I am not here to name or blame other countries but it is up to the voices in Myanmar. I think to do these analyses and to do some comparison and also to get this kind of understanding. That is what I would say on the issue of migration. But obviously beyond that when you are going to talk with westerners and western foreigners they are going to raise topics like social integration. You have people of great diversity. Anything that much to be said about Myanmar history whether a successful example of living together or being able to live together, and obviously when we open the newspapers and we also see many examples and when it is a youth problem and where the country is trying to find its way to look towards a peaceful future. In that way sometimes I am and that in my personal opinion disappointed that the situation in Rakhine State is always put up like exceptional with the rest of the country. There are many things you know that I think that what we are talking about here is one of them for the whole country and should sometimes not be completely viewed as a totally separate issue. That is my personal opinion as an outsider. Thank you.

Moderator: May I add some words about the mass migration in the whole of Asia? If we look at the history of the world, you can see people from the Indian subcontinent have the largest and the greatest mass migration throughout the history. The first large migration from the Indian sub-continent is to the East Indies Islands. Earlier there was a large Buddhist country. Then Hindus came and they were all Dravidian descendants. Later those entire Buddhists became Hindus. And they stretched to Cambodia and all the Buddhists of Cambodia converted to Hindu. After the Hindus, Muslim traders followed. Later all the people of the kingdom became Muslims. Such incidents can also been seen in some parts of Southeast Asia. So I would like the audience to take a note that mass migration from the Indian sub-continent was nothing like the Western Europeans mass migration to Americas during the 17th and 18th centuries.

U Ko Ko Hlaing: Thank you. I would like to support my friend Mr Leider that in comparison of the illegal migration into our country the same fate encountered in India. The governor of Assam reported to the governor general of India about the illegal migration into Assam. Illegal migrants were beyond the control of the provisional government. So, he requested to take very strict measures on the illegal migrants. Generally, Bangladesh is a crowded nation whose population is three times larger than our country’s population. Its area is only one third of our country. People need more living space. This is the geopolitical reality. So, it’s not so strange that there is illegal immigration. So, other than those reports I will not mention the history or anything like that. After that report India took harsher measures on illegal migration. People from Bangladesh were smuggled into India. It is a big business. India erected a 2,000-mile fence along the common border with Bangladesh. And border guard force was organized with much modernized equipment and gave the order of shoot to kill. According to the media, one thousand people illegally entering into Indian territories were shot in ten years. We haven’t taken such harsh measures yet. We have finished the border fence yet to deter back-and-forth illegal migration. We are still trying. So, back-and-forth illegal migration is a common sight at the border. So, another point I’d like to mention is that the mass migration back and forth is actually caused by the natural and man-made disasters. I have earlier mentioned the rapid influx in the colonial era. In 1942 Bengal faced very serious cyclone and in 1943 Great Bengal famine occurred. Few people knew about that. During WWII the Bengal region faced a lot of hardships due to disease, famines and also in 1942 it faced communal riots, people didn’t want to live in those regions moved to northern Rakhine together with British forces led by Field Marshal William Slim after the WWII. There was another influx. And in 1971 both natural and man-made disasters occurred in Bangladesh. The 1971 Chittagong cyclone killed more than 100,000 people. And in 1991, there were super cyclones. There were problems of illegal migration and verification, fleeing people, international pressures and returnees who we had to accept throughout the history starting from our independence. The accusations of the mass killing, arson and gang rapes are not so strange. Even in the post-independence period and due to the military pressure on the mujahidin movement there was mass migration of refugees from northern Rakhine to the then east Pakistan. East Pakistan government at that time accused us of the same allegations now. Because the renegade troop leader former police corporal led the newly established Pakistani government. And the Pakistani government accused us. At the time Prime Minister U Nu not under the military rule was under the democratic rule and Pakistani government strongly protested Myanmar government. They could not sit idle. But the accusations were the same old ones killing, arson or gang rape. U Nu was a very patient leader. He brought back former Myanmar Ambassador to Pakistan U Pe Khin, who also was a Muslim and a seasoned diplomat. He was assigned as the first Ambassador to Pakistan. So he had many friends in Pakistani government. So the Prime Minister sent U Pe Khin to Pakistan to explain to realize the real situation. Because of the U Pe Khin’s efforts, Pakistan government then withdrew the protest. As far as I know it is the fourth time we were accused by the biased media and also some international quarters. But the real thing was that our neighbouring countries are prone to natural disasters and sometimes political instability and that force people out of their countries. Because of the 1971 incident, many people from Chittagong illegally entered into our territories. Cyclones were not the only reason. In 1971 Bangladesh independence war broke out. There were intense battles in and near Chittagong. So many war refugees and other disaster-hit people illegally entered our country. At the time some Rakhine elders told that many Bengali people from Chittagong were roaming around the city of Sittway asking for job and food. That’s the reality. There was no official record about those people. The mass migration was very large at that time. That made Myanmar government to check and verify the illegal settlers. At that time Myanmar was in transition to BSPP government. Under the new 1974 constitution, we need precise date before adopting the socialism. We conducted census in 1973. But the illegal migrants quite afraid of the census fled again. So there was Dragon King Operation followed by Hintha to accept those people. That was another international pressure. The government said that the number of people it had accepted was larger than the people who fled. We had to accept many new ones who could not speak Rakhine dialects or Myanmar. That was a very bitter experience we heard from local narratives. Very few knew about that. But the thing is that we have been always the bad guys, perpetrators or arsonists. These are the true facts you can find on the internet about the 1971 cyclone, 1991 cyclone and what happened to them. After 1970s, the 1973 census found abnormal population growth in that Mayu district area. According to 1973 census annual population growth rate was more than eight percent which was unnatural. It clearly showed that there might be illegal migration. That’s why we launched operation Dragon King which led to the adoption of the 1982 Citizenship Law. But that law, the 1982 Citizenship Law is due to that incident alone. The consideration of the then leaders at the time is beyond this area. We have only hundred miles of land borders with Bangladesh. We have more than a thousand miles of land borders with China, the most populous country in the world, and also with the second most populous country of the world, India. So, Myanmar cannot survive without strict immigration policies and laws. But at the time the leader, world famous legal scholar Dr Maung Maung considered to be in line with international laws and international standards as much as he can. But we need to cope with local situations, we need to consider about our national security for the long term. Every country has their own style of immigration policies and laws. Even in democracies, you can see that in Australia I don’t know military attaché from Australia here; they have very strict immigration policies. Illegal immigrants are put in island outside of the country by laws. And even it arranged to hire Cambodia to put people from Southeast Asian countries, also even in western countries, European countries. Now, they are facing migration crises. They also have to contain those illegal migrants in camps. Even friends, my colleague country is also facing the same problem. So that migration and citizenship laws must be in line with the national interests. But I don’t mean we can reject all the international norms and standards and international laws as Myanmar is a sovereign state. We can maintain our national interest if we cannot compromise. Our national security is the first priority rather than other considerations on humanitarian grounds. Those are my points. (To be Continued)