Three Years since Their Genocide Began, the Rohingya Remain Desperate for Help
ASIA-UPDATES ON MYANMAR ROHINGYA GENOCIDE, 7 Sep 2020
Editorial Board | The Washington Post - TRANSCEND Media Service
Stranded Rohingya people sit on the deck of an abandoned smugglers’ boat drifting in the Andaman Sea.
13 Aug 2020 – “The struggle of man against power,” wrote Czech novelist Milan Kundera, “is the struggle of memory against forgetting.” This is precisely where the Rohingya Muslims find themselves today, three years after 750,000 people were terrorized and torched out of their homes by Myanmar’s security forces and forced into miserable camps in Bangladesh. The crimes against the Rohingya — and their ongoing misery — must not be forgotten.
In August 2017, Rohingya militants attacked police posts in northern Rakhine state, killing 12 members of the security forces. Myanmar’s security forces responded starting Aug. 25 with a scorched-earth campaign against the Rohingya population of Rakhine state, in the western part of the country. Thousands of civilians were killed, their villages burned to the ground, and some 750,000 people fled for their lives to Bangladesh. The violence included massacres. On Sept. 2, 10 Rohingya men from the village of Inn Din were roped together and killed. At least two had been hacked to death by Buddhist villagers, and the rest were shot by Myanmar’s security forces, according to Reuters, which interviewed witnesses to the massacre and exposed it. Later, the Myanmar authorities cleared away the Rohingya homes and paved over the Rohingya villages to create new government barracks.
Today, the Rohingya plight remains desperate. There are now about 1 million people living in five refugee camps of bamboo and plastic shelters over an area equivalent to about a third of Manhattan. Children make up about half of them. The refugees fear resettlement in Myanmar would subject them to more deprivation and violence, and efforts to negotiate a return to Rakhine state have failed twice, in 2018 and 2019. The refugees have followed closely as their case was taken up by the International Court of Justice, which ruled in January that Myanmar must implement emergency measures to protect them against violence and preserve evidence of possible genocide. The ruling came after Myanmar’s leader, Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, personally argued before the court in The Hague that the Rohingya exodus had not been mass murder. The Myanmar government has rejected the court’s ruling, which is only the first step in a process that will probably take years.
It is time to call the Rohingya destruction what it is: a crime against humanity, and genocide. The definition of “genocide” in international law is: “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”
Using the word “genocide” won’t bring the Rohingya home. But it will serve as a reminder to [Nobel Peace laureate] Aung San Suu Kyi – and to the world – of what happened. It will help the struggle of memory not to forget — neither the crime nor the urgent need for redress.
, Aung San Suu Kyi
, Cultural violence
, Direct violence
, Ethnic Cleansing
, Free Rohingya Coalition
, Human Rights
, International Court of Justice
, Maung Zarni
, Social justice
, Structural violence
, United Nations
, Yanghee Lee
DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Join the discussion!
We welcome debate and dissent, but personal — ad hominem
— attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), abuse
and defamatory language will not be tolerated.
Nor will we tolerate attempts to deliberately disrupt discussions.
We aim to maintain an inviting space to focus on intelligent
interactions and debates.