A straight forward message was
given by history Professor Aye Chan of Kanda University of Japan that
there is no Rohingya in Myanmar, tracing back to centuries of Rakhine
chronicle at a lively lecture in spacious MICT Park of Yangon on March
14.
The lecture was attended by members of Rakhine social associations representing Rakhine State among other interested audience.
At the dynamic talk, Professor Aye Chan
fanned out the themes on Rakhine chronicle, Bengalis and Rohingya with
historical evidences.
According to Aye Chan, there is no
national as Rohingya people in history and that the historians would be
unethical if they considered things merely on the basis of patriotism
and moreover, they should not advocate on the wrong premises. One must
not talk or write without the firm evidences and that the history
writers must try to present the truth by setting aside the partisanship.
He said that he had never advocated on behalf of any national race in
the discussions or writings.
The professor continued, “In the
chronicle of Myanmar, there never were Rohingya people. I always talk
and declare this statement. However, I respect and pay esteem to human
rights matters. I have never committed or slip of tongue that undermined
human rights. All the evidences are with me.”
Elaborating the past, he said that the
existing problem was the bad legacy of the colonial rule for over one
hundred year in Myanmar. Landlords in colonial India were given titles
such as “Chowdhury” where they cleared up the virgin lands for
cultivation and enjoyed (10) years land revenue exemption. Therefore,
the rice millers and rice companies working under the British colony
called in the workers from Chittagong (now Bangladesh) to Rakhine State
(Arakan State of Burma), where they accumulated wealth. Therefore many
people from Chittagong migrated in mass to Rakhine State.
He added, “The incidents that occurred
in Rakhine State were not in the nature of sudden outburst. The issue
was burning slowly and discreetly underneath for very long. It started
as slow burner since 70 years ago. We forget the issue and keep it in
negligence. We have never thought that one day the issue might burst
out. When it erupted, we witnessed unpleasant events. We have not
expected that such bomb would explode at a certain time.”
There are talks and discussions
spreading to the effect calling for peaceful coexistence between Rakhine
national races and Bengali.
The Professor raised a question to the
audience, “There is request for cash donation to wage religious war
(Jihad - - a holy war fought by Muslims to defend Islam). The handouts
are distributed in the Islamic countries. Bank accounts for such
donations are opened in Chittagong and Dhaka in Bangladesh. With such
sinister scheme in the pipeline, will you believe the idea of peaceful
coexistence with Rakhine nationals and Bengali?”
He continued his talks by saying that
the word “Rohingya” was first introduced in an article in the then
Guardian daily newspaper published in Yangon by a person named Mr. Abu
Gaffer, nationalities representative of Buthitaung Township of Rakhine
State in 1951. The writer asserted that the Muslims residing in
Buthitaung and Maungtaw townships were not the illegal migrants sneaking
from the other country, but the residents for centuries. Rohingya were
the descendants of the Arabs from the Middle East who survived from ship
wrecked in the sea and settled down by marrying the local Rakhine
women. The Rohingya are the offspring of the settlers.”
He said, “Just imagine one more point on
the appalling assertion that they married the local Rakhine girls and
that the Rohingya were born. Think of it. Was that possible? I and
French historian Jacques Leider had earlier disproved this theory about
the shipwrecked. There was no solid and firm evidence on the shipwreck.
We the historians uphold the primary source of evidences. The secondary
sources were not reliable as it contained doubtful factors. Moreover,
there may be conspiracy and hidden agenda.”
After the meeting, Dr Aye Chan replied to the queries raised by those present.
“Holding such meetings many times will
make Rakhine people and other ethnics realize the real history. I was
asked if we would like to exaggerate Rakhine conflict by holding such
meeting. No, I replied that the conflict would calm down more than the
past. I met with a Muslim from Rakhine State. He supposed that he is a
Rakhine native. They thought that they are the land lord of Rakhine
State. He is about 20 years old. I showed historical evidences to him. I
told him, “You are guest citizens and we are hosts. If you live like
the guest citizen, we can treat you like the hosts. You are wrong.” I
consider that the conflict has become quiet after realizing about the
real history,” Rakhine National Affairs Minister Zaw Aye Maung remarked.
Following are some questions and answers after the meeting.
Q: Is stone inscription a primary source or secondary one?
A: Primary source.
Q: Is Arnanda Sandra stone inscription Rakhine words or Bamar words?
A: It is neither Rakhine or Bamar words and it is Sanskirt.
Q: Are most words of Arnanda Sandra stone inscription same as those of Rohingha of today?
A: Arnanda Sandra stone inscription is
written in Sanskirt. When the language experts categorize languages,
Bengali language is Sanskirt and Pali languages. All Hindu and Bengalis
include in Indo-Arira language. For that reason, it is nothing strange
that the words of Sanskirt and Bengali are the same.
Q: Is the phrase of Parabaik compiled in
the time of Myanmar King Bodaw Phaya (Waithali age) same as the words
of Rohingya of today?
A: Parabaik used in the past cannot
exist more than fifty years. Palm-leaf cannot exist more than a century.
It had to be applied with kerosene. It is unbelievable that the phrases
written on the Parabaik in Waithali period.
“Unbelievable” my teacher Dr Myo Myint replied.
Q: There was Rohingya tribe and they
are Islamists in Arakan Rakhine region, stated in the paper of British
attaché Francis Buchanan arriving in Inwa palace in 1799?
A: This is a leading question. The way
of question is wrong and the presentation is also wrong. But I will
answer it. I have four copies of Buchanan’s book. It wrote that those
ran from Rakhine were Rakhinegya. Bengali termed Rakhine as Roshan,
Rohan. Which page number showed that those were Muslims? Who can tell
and show about that?
Q: Do you know the writer recorded that there is a separate Rohingya language and it differs from the Bengali?
A: Rohnigya means Rakhinegya and
Rahanga. Rakhine and Bengalis speak differently. Those who call
themselves Rohingya are really Bengalis. Here, there may be someone who
has been to Bangladesh. I have made two field trips. I can speak the
language used in Butheedaung and Maungdaw. While I was in Bangladesh, I
went to Arlavan region where I used the Chittagong language when I
wanted to eat mutton. But they don’t understand it. If I speak Rakhine,
some Bamar people may not understand it. There is no record that there
is a separate Rohingya language. I never lie to others. I love the
truth.
Q: Do you also know a British administrator mentioned in 1926 that there were 30,000 Arakan Muslims and 10,000 Bamars?
A: Of course, I know. But he did not
mention the term Rohingya. Jacques Leider said about more than 100,000
Rakhine people. This is not concerned with whether there is Rohingya or
not.
Q: The international community has
foreigners who are living with overstayed visas. Are they also living in
your country with overstayed visas?
A: No, they are illegal immigrants.
Q: Are there any guest citizens in the
international community who are not allowed to be naturalized? If there
are, what are their rights?
A: I have never leant that there are
guest citizens in other countries, except Myanmar. I worked in the
United States. After I had worked as a faculty member for four years, I
got a green card to live there permanently. Both my wife and daughter
got green cards. It is just a permit for permanent residence. But we
don’t have the right to vote. It is because we are not naturalized
citizens. But in Myanmar, a former immigration and population minister
(maybe Maj-Gen Maung Oo) issued white cards to the immigrants, who were
allowed to vote. Those white cards are temporary national registration
cards. They are not permanent residents. Why do they have the right to
vote? After colonizing Korea, Japanese took Koreans to their country as
slaves. The Koreans were forced to do what the Japanese did not want to.
Now those Koreans have reached the third generation. They are permanent
residents but they don’t have the right to cast a vote. In Myanmar, all
the immigrants holding white cards could vote in the previous
elections. Is there any other country that can respect human rights as
much as our country does?
Q: Are you inciting a racial conflict because you came to Yangon for such talks?
A: Actually I am kind of man who fears. I
don’t want wars. But I want to ask you a question. I will stay at your
house for one day. Then, I will ask for one day more, for a week, for a
year or two. Finally, can you accept it if I knock you out of your
house? Please answer this.
http://www.elevenmyanmar.com/politics/2801-no-rohingya-in-myanmar-professor-aye-chan-of-kanda-university#.UUWXnof006w.facebook
