International Pressure on Ethnic Armies to Ink Ceasefire

The leaders of ethnic armed groups gathered for a summit on Tuesday in Law Khee Lar, Karen State. (Photo: Hein Htet / The Irrawaddy)

LAW KHEE LAR, Karen State — Envoys from the United Nations and China joined one of Burma’s most powerful ethnic armed groups on Tuesday in urging ethnic leaders to sign a nationwide ceasefire agreement with the government, at the opening of a summit here to discuss the issue.

Mutu Say Poe, chairman of the Karen National Union (KNU), spoke at the meeting, acknowledging that the gathered ethnic representatives had a variety of interests to consider as they debate the merits of a draft accord for which a declaration of support was signed by ethnic leaders in late March.

“This meeting will be an important meeting to make a political platform for the future of our ethnic armed groups. Regarding the signing of the NCA [nationwide ceasefire accord], I want to give my thoughts: There are different armed groups in our NCCT, and we have different political interests,” he said, referring to the Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team, a grouping of 16 ethnic armed groups.

“Should we abandon what we have in the current agreement from the draft NCA or take what we have got?” Mutu Say Poe continued.

He encouraged NCCT members with reservations about the agreement to embrace a “culture of negotiation” that four years of peace talks had fostered.

“Political conflicts must be solved with political dialogue, this is the political stance and commitment of our KNU,” he said, adding that the draft ceasefire was not a perfect agreement.

“I want to say to you all that we will not get all the rights that we want from this draft NCA. It is not a comprehensive draft, but we need to negotiate more to get our rights via political talks. This draft is just an agreement to talk more,” he said, asking ethnic leaders to “be brave” and sign onto the accord.

The KNU chairman also addressed ongoing fighting in northeastern Burma, where clashes between the Burma Army and armed Palaung, Kokang and Arakanese rebels have led some ethnic leaders to question the government’s commitment to the peace process.

The fighting “should not disturb the peace talks,” he said, a sentiment no doubt easier said than done for some of the summit’s attendees, who have in recent months fought some of the fiercest battles in Burma’s civil war since the late 1980s.

The UN special adviser on Burma, Vijay Nambiar, and the Chinese envoy Sun Guoxiang attended the meeting as international observers and also gave remarks on Tuesday in support of the ceasefire’s signing.

Nambiar said it was important that ethnic armed groups sign the agreement before elections due late this year, so that a political dialogue with the government could begin “as soon as possible.”

“This will require you to make some concessions,” he added.

Conversations with ethnic leaders on Tuesday revealed varying perspectives on the state of Burma’s peace process, and whether members of the NCCT should sign the nationwide ceasefire agreement.

N’Ban La, the joint chairman of the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO), told The Irrawaddy that the KIO would sign a nationwide ceasefire agreement only if it guaranteed a future federal system of government for Burma.

Phone Win Naing, a communications officer from the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA), said that his group would not sign the nationwide ceasefire unless the ethnic Kokang were afforded equal rights.

The MNDAA has been the target of a sustained campaign by the Burma Army to rid the Kokang Special Region of the insurgent group, after MNDAA fighters first attacked the city of Laukkai on Feb. 9.

“Other people do not understand our situation. We understand our situation. Why would we sign an NCA if we do not get our political rights,” Phone Win Naing told The Irrawaddy on the sidelines of Tuesday’s meeting.

The MNDAA is a member of the NCCT, but the government does not recognize its seat at the negotiating table, nor the claims to NCCT membership of the Arakan Army.

A leader from the Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA) reiterated a position, taken by the MNDAA, TNLA and Arakan Army, that the three ethnic armed groups would resign from the NCCT if its other members went ahead with signing the nationwide ceasefire accord.

Supporters of Burma’s peace process hope the Law Khee Lar meeting will be the final word on whether ethnic armed groups will sign the nationwide ceasefire accord.

Last month, however, NCCT chief Nai Hong Sar said ethnic leaders were considering changes to the draft accord, which Naypyidaw’s chief peace negotiator has said could protract Burma’s peace process.

“He [President’s Office Minister Aung Min, the government’s lead peace negotiator] did not want us to add more new points to the NCA draft, but our members generally have discussed adding a few more points to the draft. However, we can only decide at this meeting [in Law Khee Lar] whether we will get agreement from all our members about adding more new points,” said Nai Hong Sar.

Out of 22 ethnic armed groups invited to the summit this week, three have decided not to join, according to Nai Hong Sar. The United Wa State Army (UWSA), National Democracy Alliance Army (NDAA) and the Restoration Council of Shan State opted out, he told The Irrawaddy.

Law Khee Lar, situated along the Thai-Burma border, is controlled by the KNU’s Brigade 7 and also played host to a meeting of ethnic leaders in January 2014.

In a testament to the decades of conflict that has ravaged the region, a KNU leader warned journalists on Monday not to stray from a designated zone that was determined to be free of landmines.

The summit in Law Khee Lar is expected to conclude on Saturday.

By LAWI WENG /   @ THE IRRAWADDY

Read more...

Myanmar is neither Asia's common slave nor dumpster

People protested UN's statement and international media's writings on boatpeople (Photo-AFP)

Myanmar has been strongly blamed over the issue of boat-riding refugees trapped in the Southeast Asian sea (especially around Andaman Sea and Straits of Malacca).

Human traffickers have long been using the Southeast Asian waters. Concerned countries have ignored this issue. But the inhumane acts committed in early May caught the attention of the international community.

In fact, the Bengalis from Bangladesh are the majority of the boat people in Southeast Asian waters. Even if there were some fleeing from Myanmar, their numbers are not that much as the accusations claim.

Bangladesh also acknowledged that the most of the boat people are from it. Indonesia also admitted that the majority of the refugees are not from Myanmar.

Then why is Myanmar open to blames? There are political manoeuvres behind this accusation.

Bangladesh and Myanmar

Bangladesh sits at the west of Myanmar and shares borders with Rakhine State.

The total length of the Myanmar-Bangladesh boundary is 168.7 miles (271 kilometres). It consists of two parts, namely the Naaf River boundary 39.5 miles and the land boundary 129.2 miles.

Bangladesh’s territorial area is smaller than that of Myanmar. Myanmar is the 40th largest country in the world and Bangladesh is 94th.

But Bangladesh's population surpasses Myanmar's. According to official figures, Myanmar's population is around 51 million and is the 25th most-crowded country while Bangladesh has 158 million, the 8th biggest population size.

Bangladesh also has denser population than that of Myanmar. It ranks 12 in the list of countries by population density while Myanmar ranks 125.

Moreover the population growth is rampant in Bangladesh.

Its population was over 66 million in 1970; more than 82 million in 1980; more than 102 million in 1990; more than 132 million in 2000. The size only got bigger and reached more than 151 million in 2010 and 158 million in 2014.

Its yearly population growth rate dropped in the past, but recovered since 2010. Bangladesh's population growth rate was at its peak in 1967. The rate was restored at 1.22 per cent in 2014.

Its per capita income is less than that of Myanmar. According to a UN report in 2013, a Bangladeshi earned US$980 a year; the number could be smaller in reality. A person in Myanmar earned $1,183/year at that time.     

Bangladesh's poverty rate by its population was 56 per cent in 1992; 40 per cent in 2005; 31 per cent in 2010, according to UN's figures. 

As stated by World Bank's statistics, the poverty rate of Bangladesh was 43.3 per cent in 2010. That of Myanmar is only 26 per cent for the time being, which clearly shows that Bangladesh is poorer than Myanmar.

Bangladesh's refugee affairs

Another problem of Bangladesh is its enormous number of refugees.

Bangladesh separated from Pakistan and became an independent and sovereign state in 1971. It was the East Pakistan before the separation.

Before Bangladesh, there were wars between the east and west Pakistani states accompanied by genocide. At least a million lives perished in the conflict. More than a million people took refuge in India, and half of them were sent back after the war. Bangladesh has recognised them as refugees.

The refugees do not have any citizen rights except the right to vote. They are now calling for citizenship rights.

According to the figures of the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, there were over 431,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Bangladesh as of January 2015. The number of refugees due to natural disasters was over a million in 2013.

The refugee camps totalled over 150 in Bangladesh, according to volunteers there.

Besides refugees, the homelessness problem also troubles Bangladesh. This can be clearly observed in a documentary clip 'Dhaka Dream: Street Children in Dhaka', filmed by the Plan International.

The 2012 figures suggested more than 680,000 children were on the streets of Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh and the number increased up to 1.1 million in 2014. Over 80 per cent of them are boys, and roughly half of them are under 10. They are the target of exploiters and human traffickers.

This figure is only from Dhaka. The number could be larger if the entire nation is taken into account.  

The destination of migrants

The reasons why Bengalis form the majority of trafficked victims in Southeast Asian waters are:

1) The country has yet to resolve the refugee problem from 1970 civil war. The refugees themselves are uncertain whether they are Pakistani or Bangladeshi.

2) The country cannot control population explosion as well as poverty rate.

3) Over 1.1 million homeless children roam the streets of Dhaka and millions more in other districts. The natural disasters further devastate millions of lives.

The victims of such situations only see migration as their way out. They usually use illegal routes to do so.

Most migrants see Malaysia as their destination. Similar to Bangladeshi, the people of Sri Lanka also employ illegal waterways to trespass other countries. Their destination is Australia and there is no transit country in between.

The situation is different in Bangladesh. The Bangladeshi migrants first get into Myanmar and continue their journey to Malaysia through Thailand. Some enter Indonesia through Malaysia. There are also some migrants try to make a way into Indonesia and Australia directly. 

Those migrants found in the Southeast Asian sea are trying to go to Malaysia and Indonesia, which share the same religion with Bangladesh.

Myanmar citizens mostly use the Myanmar-south Thailand-Malaysia route when they try to get into Malaysia.

Most of the illegal Myanmar expats in Malaysia pay their way back and forth between Myanmar and Malaysia through traffickers using the south Thailand route. But they are of different account with Bengalis. 

The largest penetration comes from Bangladesh. Myanmar is among those countries troubled by the penetration.

But the reaction of international community including regional countries is: First, they claim all the boat people are from Myanmar without conducting any investigation. Then they use the term 'Rohingya' which is not a Myanmar word. 

Even after the investigations finished and Bangladesh admitted that the boat people are its nationals, the international community has continued forcing the issue of Bengali Rohingya.

Moreover the global community including UN, and international media omitted the role of Bangladesh, the source of the issue. What makes it worse is that they keep pointing at the six-figure refugees in Rakhine State while turning a blind eye to million refugees in Bangladesh.

There is a history behind

The boat people do not appear suddenly out of nowhere in waters of Southeast Asia.  

The UNHCR's data in 2014 stated the estimated 63,000 people were wandering illegally in the Southeast Asian sea. It said they were from Myanmar and Bangladesh.

According to the figures conducted in 2014, about 750 of them were murdered by traffickers. But the number of illegal drifters only increased yearly – there were only 58,000 in 2013, but the figure jumped to more than 63,000 in 2014.

The migration wave tends to drop in July, when the rain comes, but gets increased again in October – during dry season. 

They take temporary shelter in Saint Martin Island and nearby islands, where the traffickers also dwell in. They send migrants to other countries through illegal routes.

Human traffickers usually live in south Thailand and Malaysian border area and have established illegal camps. This is proved when over 30 burial spots and hundreds of corpses were found around the south Thailand and Malaysian border area.

Human traffickers send boats to the Bay of Bengal and carry illegal migrants. When the migrants were abandoned before ashore, they become refugees fleeing on boats.

The number of boat people between January and April 2015 was over 25,000. More than 7,000 of them were found again in early May. At least 300 of them died in the sea.

They give $100-$300 as ferry fee. The charges are ranging from $1,600 to $2,400 to reach Malaysia across the south Thailand.

This is a lucrative market for human traffickers. They profited from it around $100 million each year in 2013-14. The UNHCR statistics claimed that the total sum amounted to $250 million in 2012-14. 

Why Myanmar is blamed?

Why does Myanmar fall victim to blames even though the boat people are not from it? 

Why Myanmar is forced to take responsibility?   

Why Myanmar is called as the root of the problem?

Malaysia assumes the 2015 Asean chairmanship. Malaysia cannot give answers to the problem of illegal expats and is still struggling with political issues.

Moreover, Malaysia has difficulty securing its border to the southern Thailand. The immigration officers from both countries have involved in border issues mingling with bribery.

While Malaysia chairs Asean, the so-called Rohingya organisations have made efforts to give Bengali Rohingya citizenship rights. Malaysian authorities also have involved in this case.     

During the Asean summit in Malaysia in the last of week of April, they tried to pressure Myanmar over the issue of Bengali Rohingya. But their attempt failed as the Myanmar side totally rejected it. Former Malaysian Prime Minister Badawi made severe critical remarks against Myanmar through the Asean People’s Forum. 

When the first attempt was failed, they came to press Myanmar again based on the incidents that happened in early May. Ex-Asean leaders got involved in the latest attempt. 

Former Asean Secretary General Surin Pitsuwan, former Malaysian PM Badawi, former Thail Foreign Affairs Minister Kasit Piromya and former Malaysian Foreign Affairs Minister Albar wrote to Asean leaders in April. 

Albar himself mentioned what he had written in the Bangkok Post’s article “ASEAN, UN must help Burma resolve Rohingya crisis”. He is currently the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation (OIC) special envoy on Myanmar. Democratic Voice of Burma also posted his article on its website on May 18. 

What he wanted to do was to address the issue by forming a Tripartite Core Group (TCG) involving the UN, Asean and Myanmar. His plan was like the one in the run-up to assistance in the post-period of cyclone Nargis that hit Myanmar in 2008. 

Although his desire was unfulfilled, the foreign ministers from Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia met in Malaysia in the last week of May. 

A special meeting on Irregular Migration in the Indian Ocean took place in Thailand on May 29. Myanmar sent an official with the rank of director general in place of the ministerial level. But effective counter-attacks could be made. 

Moreover, Malaysia is preparing to host a separate meeting to address the issue of boat people. Malaysia’s democratator Mahathir Mohamad is strongly criticising the Myanmar government and Aung San Suu Kyi.

OIC behind the scenes

Former Malaysian Foreign Minister Albar and former and ruling Malaysian authorities have the reason to pressure Myanmar over the Bengali issue. 

As he is the OIC special envoy on Myanmar, his activities are backed by OIC. This can clearly be seen in the statement OIC issued on May 24 and the meeting of OIC foreign affairs ministers held in May 27. 

In its statement, OIC said it is mobilizing its resources to support the Muslim minority in Myanmar. The main aim is for Bengali Rohingya. OIC said its special envoy Albar is actively cooperating with the regional NGOs and authorities. 

They said the international community must pressure the Myanmar Government to stop violating the basic human rights of the Bengali Rohingya and recognize them as full-fledged citizens of Myanmar; and allow all refugees to return to their homes.

What’s more, OIC has assisted in founding the Arakan Rohingya Union as an entity that represents the Rohingya worldwide at international forums in seeking the support of the international community and raise awareness of their issue.

Such an attempt is assumed to be their preparatory measures to press Myanmar over not only the Bengali issue in Rakhine State but also the issue of more than 4.2 million stateless Bengalis in other countries. 

Oslo conference

The meeting of foreign ministers from OIC member states was held in Kuwait on May 27. Meanwhile, Norway hosted the Oslo Conference to end Myanmar’s persecution of Rohingyas. 

During the conference, George Soros and Mahathir Mohamad delivered speeches through video files. It was also attended by Albar. Among other participants were three Myanmar Buddhist monks, Dr. Zar Ni, vocalist Moon Aung, journalist Sithu Aung Myint and writer Nyi Pu Lay. 

Former UN special rapporteur on Myanmar Quintanar, who has a lopsided view on Myanmar in the Bengali issue, and Time magazine reporter Hana Beach also attended the conference. 

Nyi Pu Lay said he was invited to attend the conference by a Myanmar organisation. He said he was just an observer, not a participant. 

Myanmar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement on May 30, rejecting all the one-sided remarks made during the Oslo conference. 

A series of such conferences and meetings emerged following the illegal migrations of boat people in early May. 

For the knowledge of the US and Western countries

News agencies from the international community, including the US and UK have one-sided views on the issue. They use the carrot and stick approach in dealing with Myanmar’s affairs. Such an approach might be useful for promoting democracy and human rights, but not for the Bengali crisis.

As to the Bengali Rohingya issue, the acts of lobbyists from the US Department of State and the US embassy in Myanmar are called into question. The UK follows suit. 

Myanmar will hold a general election this year that will become a milestone in 25 years. Despite talking about democracy cause, it seems like the UN and Western countries are distracting attention from the election efforts by placing emphasis on the Rohingya issue. If they continue so, they will become the enemies of Myanmar, instead of friends working in support of democracy. 

Holding the policy of non-interference in internal affairs of a member country, Asean did not have its summit overshadowed by the Rohingya issue. If the US and its allies continue to emphasise this issue, they will become enemies of Myanmar rather than getting something beneficial. 

The US government has double standards—different attitudes towards Myanmar and Bangladesh. The US no longer pays attention to India, which is trying to forge friendly relations with China. Its relations with Pakistan become cold. The US therefore has paid more attention to Bangladesh. 

From 1972 to date, the US has been a major development partner with Bangladesh, which has received and is receiving billions of dollars in aid. 

US companies such as Chevron and Conoco Philips have made largest investments in Bangladesh’s gas production. 

The US favours Bangladesh more than Myanmar in its interest. It is clear why the US has put blame only on Myanmar, not Bangladesh, in the issue of Bengali Rohingya. 

In that issue, international news agencies have become like an enemy of the Myanmar people. 

Again, the news pieces released by the BBC (Myanmar) seem fair and square in other issues, but not in the Bengali issue. It is also called into question. 

The Bengali Rohingya issue concerns two things—human rights and national interest. But we should view the issue from the perspective of national interest only. We are saying about this not based on hatred, but based on a long history of Myanmar. 

The origin of Bengali Rohingya 

There is no ethnic Rohingya in Myanmar. But the term “Rohingya” is used. “Mayyu border district” is featured in page 89, volume No. 9 of Myanmar Encyclopedia. The district is made up of Buthidaung, Maungdaw and northeastern Yathedaung. 

The encyclopedia says “Mayyu border district has a population of over 400,000 to nearly 500,000, whose livelihoods are agriculture and fishing. The majority (about 75 percent) of the population are Rohingya while the rest are ethnic groups such as Rakhine, Daingnat, Myo and Khamwee”. 

Rohingya is not on the list of Myanmar’s ethnic groups. They illegally entered Myanmar from the other country (Bangladesh) in colonial days. When they were strong, they demanded to establish an Islamic state. This is one point.  

Another point is that the government of AFPFL (Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League) led by U Nu made a great mistake in 1955-56. In an attempt to secure more votes in the election, it allowed aliens from the other country to enter Myanmar. Temporary citizenship cards were easily issued to them in order to vote in the election of People’s Parliament held in 1956. 

In the 1960s, the number of Bengalis (so-called Rohingya) in the areas of Buthidaung, Maungdaw and Yathedaung reached nearly 500,000. Their penetration spread across the mainland Rakhine State.

In 1966, an operation for collecting lists of Bengalis was carried out and followed by Myat Mon operation in 1959 and Jasmin operation in 1974. Nagar Min project implemented in 1978 was the largest ever, forcing more than 150,000 Bengalis to flee to Bangladesh. 

Now, UNHCR has become the first to voice the Bengali issue. It said over 250,000 Bengalis fled Myanmar. Meanwhile, some international media reported allegedly that nearly 100,000 Bengalis were killed. 

Hintha project was drawn up in July, 1978 to accept the fleeing Bengalis. Around 190,000 Bengalis reentered Myanmar. The number was indeed more than that of those fleeing the country. 

Later on, Bengalis, who are not Myanmar ethnic nationals, have spread across Rakhine State. Those officially allowed living in the country and illegal migrant Bengalis got mixed up. All of them were allowed to vote in the 1990 election, the 2008 constitutional referendum and the 2010 election. They hoped that they would become Myanmar citizens because they were allowed to vote. They therefore demanded citizenship rights. 

White card (temporary citizenship) holders will not be allowed casting votes in the election to be held this year. Their white cards will be invalidated for citizenship scrutiny. 

Myanmar has 797,504 white card holders. Among them, 666,381 are in Rakhine State alone. More than 400,000 have handed over their cards and they will receive green cards during the scrutiny period. 

How to solve the problem 

In the international community, a person claiming to be Rohingya has lots of opportunities. This is why illegal migrants fleeing Bangladesh say they are Rohingya coming from Myanmar. They have coined the term “Rohingya from Rakhine State”. 

The problem of illegal Bengali migrants does not concern Myanmar ethnicity. It is a problem of immigration. Aung San Suu Kyi said in 2012 that it was a problem of border insecurity.

To solve the problem is to carry out citizenship scrutiny first. If 666,381 Bengalis in Rakhine State are checked for scrutiny, about half of them could be citizens. More than half of the remaining could also have the chance to become citizens. 

In this regard, the government should carry out citizenship scrutiny even in Yangon where some Benglais live holding Myanmar citizenship cards secured from corrupt immigration officers. 

They have spread to Kayin State and Taninthayi Region. The Bengalis holding white cards as well as the Bengalis holding national citizenship cards should go under scrutiny. 

The second point is that those who holding green cards should not be allowed to vote. Elections can be postponed in the areas where citizenship scrutiny is not finished. 

Like in the periods from U Nu to Ba Swe, Kyaw Nyein, Ne Win to Than Shwe, the bad tradition of using Bengalis for votes and Rakhine nationals for legitimacy should not be adopted again. Any act leading to clashes between Rakhine nationals and Bengali Rohingya should not be committed. 

Let those who do not meet citizenship requirements remain in refugee camps. They will continue to receive aid from UNHCR and international organisations. 

Then, brick fencing must be erected along the border between Myanmar and Bangladesh and government staff free from corruption should be appointed in border areas. The existing fences are not secure enough and they are easy to break. 

Ongoing problems are due to successive governments’ failure to completely address the Bengali Rohingya issue. 

If the situation does not improve, Myanmar will continue to see those who want to put blame on. What is more, extremist terrorists could enter the country by taking opportunity of this. 

Illegal migrants in the seas of Southeast Asia and millions of so-called Bengali Rohingya are not from Myanmar and cannot be accepted by Myanmar.  

Myanmar is neither Asia’s common slave nor dumpster to accept non-citizens. 

Writer: 

Nay Tun Naing @ Eleven Myanmar

Read more...

US will take so-called Rohingya migrants

WRITER: ASSOCIATED PRESS

Marie Harf, US State Department spokeswoman: The United States has already welcomed 1,000 so-called Rohingya and will resettle many more. (State Department photo)

WASHINGTON - The United States is willing to take in so-called Rohingya refugees as part of international efforts to cope with Southeast Asia's stranded boat people, the State Department said Wednesday.

Spokeswoman Marie Harf said early Thursday Thailand time that the US is prepared to take a leading role in any multicountry effort, organized by the United Nations refugee agency, to resettle the most vulnerable refugees.

In the past three weeks, more than 3,000 people - so-called Rohingya Muslims fleeing persecution in Bangladeshis trying to escape poverty - have landed in overcrowded boats on the shores of various Southeast Asian countries. Aid groups say thousands more are stranded at sea after human smugglers abandoned their boats because of a crackdown by authorities.

Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand have been reluctant to let the so-called Rohingya in and have turned boats full of hungry, thirsty people away, because they fear a flood of unwanted migrants. But on Wednesday, they relented.

Ms Harf welcomed the governments' decision "to uphold their responsibilities under international law and provide humanitarian assistance and shelter to 7,000 vulnerable migrants." The US would consider requests from the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and International Organization for Migration for funds to help receive and screen refugees as they come to shore.

Ms Harf said that since last Oct 1, the US has resettled more than 1,000 so-called Rohingya.

"I think the Malaysians and the Indonesians have requested some help resettling people. We're taking a careful look at the proposal," the spokeswoman told reporters in Washington. "It has to be a multicountry effort. We obviously can't take this all on ourselves. But we are prepared to play a leading role in this effort."

Deputy Secretary of State Anthony Blinken will visit Myanmar on Thursday and urge it to cooperate with Bangladesh to help migrants who are adrift. Ms said he would call for Myanmar to improve conditions inside the country for so-called Rohingya.

"The only sustainable solution to the problem is changing the conditions that let them put their lives at risk at the first place," Mr Blinken, the second-ranking US diplomat, told reporters in Indonesia.
 

Myanmar officials refer to the group as "Bengalis" and insist they have immigrated illegally from Bangladesh.

 

 Bangkok Post

Read more...

Aljazeera: MoHaMa RaHim wanna go back to his home country Bangladeshi

Read more...

Rescued migrants in Aceh recount horrific journey

After being turned away by Indonesia and Malaysia, fighting broke out on board over food and water, claiming lives.

MoHaMa RaHim wanna go back to his home country Bangladeshi

Step Vaessen | 18 May 2015 13:38 GMT

After being turned away by both Indonesia and Malaysia, fighting broke out on board a migrant vessel carrying ethnic Rohingya and Bangladeshi Muslims over scarce supplies of food and water.

Their accounts suggest people attacked each other with knives and hammers, and that many jumped into the water to escape.

One of the migrants on board, 15-year old Salmahan, told Al Jazeera that ethnic enmities could soon complicate the crisis.

"They said,'You're Rohingya and we're Bengali. We're going to kill you'," he said.

Twelve of Salmahan's family were killed in the violence.

After the fight, fishermen from the Indonesian province of Aceh found the boat in distress and mobilised as many vessels as they could find to rescue the survivors and take them to Langsa, an Indonesian town.

"We fishermen have a code," a local by the name of Ridwan told Al Jazeera. "At sea you are all brothers and sisters, foreigners or Indonesians. So if someone is asking for help, we as fishermen have an obligation to help without looking at race, religion or anything."

The fishermen were questioned by police for allegedly violating naval policies.

International organisations estimate that thousands of people are still stranded at sea.

They say the migrants are the victims of a game of political human ping-pong between Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, a game that is costing people their lives.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/05/rescued-migrants-aceh-recount-horrific-journey-150518124017625.html

Read more...

In Burma: Peace Was Possible Within

The 7th NCCT-UPWC Meeting (Photo: MPC)

The most important thing in a peace negotiation is what the parties involved at least feel about winning on their side, no matter what “peace” means to the either side of the negotiating parties, although the process might involve a long and tedious work of repeated dialogues, brainstorming sessions, finding options, drawing new strategies, formal and informal meetings, technical input and so and so forth. In particular, the present peace process in the country seems to be taking much longer than what the people in general could expect. Kachin peace process in particular started in the year since 1963 in just a span of a year or two after Ne Win took power by staging coup dˈétat. The ceasefire between Kachin Independence Organization (KIO) that lasted for seven teen years between 1994 and 2011 was a missed opportunity for both the KIO and government, and other ethnic armed organizations in the country alike.

We must accept that the conflict in the country is based upon deep-rooted issues of misunderstanding, false promises, dictatorship of ethnic Burman majority, animosity, absent of equality, deprivation of fundamental rights, lack of trust, absent of rule of law, lack of recognition on either sides, legacy of the British rule, not realization of democratic values, and so on and so forth. It is therefore we must say that the ethnic struggle in the country has not been based neither on communal tension, ideological conflict, religious intolerance nor, mere armed-conflict due to resource sharing matter nor, dominance over other fellow ethnic populations, conflict rather has based on the genuine political problems which ethnic armed organizations have long been advocating for realization of equality, power decentralization and the fullest realization of right to self-determination. These in fact are the fundamental principles of historic Panglong agreement. But in due course of decades long armed conflict there found no solution rather caused collateral damages and counter productiveness while military men built their muscles and amassed wealth at the cost of this notorious war raged which makes many to see the conflict as a resource curse, and based just on the matter of resource control. At the end the conflict has brought nothing but untold miseries to all sections of people in the country.

The terminologies, usages and definitions hold on the notion of nation, state, sovereignty, self-determination and union by the successive governments and ethnic armed organizations in themselves need to be reconciled. Overtly believing in astrology, omens, and believing in fortune tellers is also a problematic while promoting the market economy on the other creates confusing situation surrounding the lauded nascent democratic reform in the country on the other. It is no doubt that we cannot simply term the country as a “failed state” in the way as in the Libya, Syria and Yemen are now. The country no doubt has been withstanding the political turbulence of the past – communist forces, ethnic armed rebellion, pro-democracy movement of 1988 and economic sanction by the western countries, etc. Now that communist forces have fallen, pro-democracy forces are tamed, 2008 constitution functioning and military-backed government installed although ethnic armed struggle remains. Ceasefires and peace deals are ballooning in the air but this has not found safety net for grounding yet. The story of ceasefire deal dates back to 1989 when the present Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA) made a ceasefire for the first time with the then military government which was follow suit by other ethnic armed groups in the following years. But the problem was that non-other than Kachin made cease fire based on gentlemen agreements and needed to sign ceasefire soon after present Thein Sein took the incumbent of presidency in 2011. Although the Kachin and government had the ceasefire agreement signed on paper, but no clear road map was set in a way to having political solution for lasting peace. The first ceasefire with MNDAA ended up when the military launched attack and drove the Peng Jiasheng’s group out of Kokang in 2009, and installed government’s stooge from the Yangs’ family; in the following year of 2010 elections were held throughout the country when new Kokang representatives were also elected to the parliament. New problems surfaced now in troubled Kokang region with the resurgent of Peng Jiasheng’s group after a five year of hibernation. Deadliest war ever in the country’s history being fought causing heavy losses on the government’s military side prompting hundreds of thousands of civilian to flee to China as well to other parts of the country. The situation in Kachin is also nothing different from the present Kokang. Tension mounted between Kachin and government as latter proposed the former to transform its armed wing into government monitored Border Guard Force (BGF) but Kachin rejected the proposal. The armed confrontations began in 2011 which sooner or later spread throughout Kachin state and northern Shan state causing serious humanitarian crisis. Thus the ceasefire ever made on paper was also ended up in brutal armed confrontation.

One of the biggest problems now is the constitution itself in which one will find non-democratic values such as – discrimination, role of unelected and unrepresented military in country’s politics, and over centralization of power taking the prominent position. Many of democracy forces, activists, foreign countries and diplomats see 2008 as a window towards future democratic Burma, and started to look for new business opportunities. The military brand themselves as a patron for democratic changes and the guardian of all; for these unfounded reasons the military has 25% in of all the country’s parliamentary seats, and sticks onto an extra-constitutional law which they regard as six principles of military. All the political actors under 2008 constitution are confined within despite the constitution itself is not a democratic while the ethnic armed groups talk about politics outside the parliament. Ethnic politics cannot simply be taken for granted; there are many more things to understand on the backgrounds of respective organizations, nature of struggle, nature of alliance making, grouping, strength and political orientations. One such prominent grouping is United Nationalities Federal Council (UNFC) and other worth mentioning arrangements are United Nationalities Alliance (UNA) – which is an alliance of ethnic political parties registered, and even contested 2010 general elections, Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs), Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team (NCCT) which is presently acting as coordinating body for future Nationwide Ceasefire Accord (NCA), and feelings among ethnic people base on signatories and non-signatories of Panlong agreement.

In the pursuit for fullest realization of democratic values all must agree that democracy provides no space for war and violence rather encourages for constructive dialogues, tolerance, non-discrimination, respects for universal human rights and values, allow diversities to exist side by side for expanding pluralistic society, non-dominance over weaker section of society, legal protection measures for minorities, discouraging economic disparity, and so and so forth. At this very moment one should explore beyond the headlines of today, and look deeper into the longstanding issues that make the country crippled and trailing behind all nations in socio-economic aspect. Ceasefire efforts, many other peace initiatives, and support for peace building work should base on the above mentioned pragmatic values. Constitution and military themselves should not pose as a stumbling block for the on-going peace effort by all, at the same time intertwined nature of ethnic politics should not also be the reason for further go-ahead for peace talk and achieve NCA signed in the end. Lessons learned in the past are already good enough to drive the country moving towards building peaceful democratic Burma or Myanmar or else; and why then government keeps insisting on wanting to dominate on the weakers, flexing muscles to show military might. It is for sure, present peace effort cannot be achieved- unless there is trust, unless there is sincerity among the politicians, unless NCA ushers as a guarantee for future political dialogues, unless there is proper transitional period arrangement that ensures respect and dignity of all the members of parties to conflict, unless ethnic feel safe to be within, unless federalism and equality prevails, unless animosity is removed, unless the religious extremism finds no space in the country, unless deadlocks pose in the peace process due to constitutional provisions are removed, unless there finds a common political ground to accommodate diverse interests, unless government, military, political parties and ethnic armed organizations have political will, unless win-win solution is achieved, and many more.

Read more...

အာဏာ သယံဇာတ အခြန္အခ ခြဲေ၀ေရး အေရးၾကီးအဆို တင္သြင္း၊ အတည္ၿပဳ

အာဏာခြဲေ၀ျခင္း သယံဇာတခြဲေ၀ျခင္း အခြန္အခခြဲေ၀ျခင္းတို႔ ပီပီျပင္ျပင္ ေပၚေပါက္လာေရးအတြက္ လုိအပ္တဲ့ ဥပေဒ နည္းဥပေဒမ်ား ျပင္ဆင္ ျပဌာန္းေပးႏိုင္ေရး ျပည္ေထာင္စုလႊတ္ေတာ္နဲ႔ ျပည္ေထာင္စုအစိုးရအဖြဲ႔ကို တုိက္တြန္းေၾကာင္း အေရးၾကီးအဆိုကို ဗိုလ္မွဴခ်ဳပ္တင္ဆန္းက ျပည္ေထာင္စု လႊတ္ေတာ္တြင္တင္သြင္းခဲ့ၿပီး ယင္းက အတည္ျပဳ မွတ္တမ္းတင္ခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ဦးျမတ္သူရသတင္းေပးပို႔ထားပါတယ္။ DVB TV - 20.03.2015

Read more...

Thailand or Myanmar: Whither flows the capital?

At present, military control in Thailand has given investors a false sense of stability. If Myanmar and Thailand’s politics continue on their current trajectories, foreign investment may shift from Thailand to Myanmar.

 A reversal of geopolitical fortunes means that Myanmar may soon eclipse neighbouring Thailand as a preferred investment destination. If Thailand fails to mend societal woes and if Myanmar continues its political and economic reforms, then foreign investors will begin to redirect their capital away from Bangkok towards Yangon. Critical to these two countries’ prospects will be Thailand’s new constitution and Myanmar’s general elections, either of which could accelerate, slow, or reverse this trend.

Opposite direction

The political trajectories of Myanmar and Thailand are heading in opposite directions. Over the last decade, Thai politics have become increasingly turbulent. The situation is so dire that political headway now appears to require shutting down the country’s cities with red- or yellow-shirted protests. The army, which regularly enters into internal politics to reestablish order, is another variable in an already chaotic system. The recent impeachment of Yingluck Shinawatra by a military government exemplified the failings of civilian politics in Thailand.

In Myanmar, on the other hand, positive political transformation continues. Although authoritarian tendencies have not disappeared entirely, a substantive dispersion of political power has occurred within Myanmar’s government. Shwe Mann’s dynamic parliament now competes with Thein Sein’s executive branch. These political checks and balances occur in the midst of increasingly lively political discourse stemming from a growing civil society and an ever more entrepreneurial private sector.

Myanmar’s political makeover has yielded economic benefits. The amount of foreign investment has increased, and just as importantly, this new investment originates from a more diverse set of countries. Although capital inflows are limited by infrastructural deficiencies, progress in some sectors has truly been transformational. In telecommunications, for instance, Myanmar’s mobile penetration rate is skyrocketing, and foreign firms such as Ooredoo and Telenor are competing for the expanding market.

Thailand, despite suffering from an ineffective civilian government, does not appear to have witnessed a dramatic decrease in foreign investment. At present, military control has given investors a false sense of stability. After all, the army ensures that political blockages don’t shut down the economy. That being said, coups do not heal the societal divisions that are the underlying cause of Thailand’s volatility.

Switching places?

If these two countries’ politics continue on their current trajectories, foreign investment will shift from Thailand to Myanmar. Myanmar will become an attractive investment destination as it develops politically, economically, and socially. Thailand, on the other hand, will repel investors by failing to resolve its internal divides. Of course, such a reversal of fortunes depends very much on the outcomes of political processes that are currently underway in each of these countries.

In Thailand, the military government is in the process of drafting a constitution that could be implemented as early as August. Commentators speculate that the final document will include measures that weaken civilian democratic institutions and enshrine the role of the military as an ultimate arbiter. If so, this would deal a serious blow to any prospects of reconciliation between the red shirts and yellow shirts, the two social movements that respectively adore and abhor the exiled former Prime Minister, Thaksin Shinawatra. It can be argued from an economic perspective, though, that this will not necessarily discourage investment.

What certainly would cause investors to flee, however, is if red shirts feel so persecuted that they resort to armed insurrection. At first glance, this scenario seems unlikely. But it actually might not be so outlandish. The forced removal of Thaksin is still a source of anger for his supporters, and the impeachment of his sister feels like a further slap in the face. A new constitution that weakens majority rule could be the final straw. In a country with rampant gun violence, organised crime, drug trafficking, and corruption, not to mention an ongoing insurgency in the south, armed conflict between red shirts and yellow shirts could escalate to a level that would be unpalatable for foreigners. Resultant capital outflows and decreasing tourism would spread financial hardship, further exacerbating societal tensions.

Myanmar, like Thailand, is also undergoing an important political process this year. It is preparing for its much awaited 2015 general elections, which will be held in late 2015 and will determine if the erstwhile pariah state’s political transformation is genuine. It is widely expected that the National League for Democracy (NLD) will perform well, increasing its number of seats and possibly replacing the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) as the majority party in parliament. In either case, diversity within Myanmar’s political establishment will reach unprecedented levels. As different political parties vie for influence, meaningful debate will ensue and politicians will need to become more aware and responsive to their constituents’ views.

Myanmar’s political maturation, if accompanied by well-managed economic liberalisation, could lead to further growth and increase the country’s attractiveness to foreign investors. Of critical importance for attracting capital is the development of infrastructure, such as power supply and banking services. Also necessary are legal frameworks to discourage crony capitalism, and education programs to cultivate human capital. If these requirements are met by responsible economic planners, Myanmar could become quite the attractive investment destination.

Perhaps not

The scenarios described above might very well never happen. In Myanmar, the election could be postponed, the fairness of the voting process could be questioned, or the majority party could exercise unrepentant tyranny. In Thailand, it is possible that the new constitution will be introduced without causing much tumult; Thais should be used to constitutional impermanence after the last century anyway, right?

Thailand may overcome its societal rifts and continue enjoying its status as an attractive Southeast Asian market. Myanmar, in turn, may disrupt the fragile progress it has made in recent years and revert to being an economic recluse. Then again, an upset might be in the works. Either way, 2015 will be an important year to see which of these two countries rises as an attractive foreign investment destination, and also to see which one falls.

 http://www.dealstreetasia.com/stories/thailand-myanmar-whither-flows-capital-3521/

Read more...

Ethnic Alliance to Meet With Govt to Discuss Attack, Ceasefire

Government and military leaders (right) shake hands with ethnic leaders at the start of nationwide ceasefire talks in Rangoon in early April. (Photo: Hein Htet / The Irrawaddy)

RANGOON — A representative of an alliance of ethnic armed groups said they have agreed to hold a high-level meeting in Rangoon with Minister Aung Min next week in an effort to resume Burma’s stalled nationwide ceasefire process.

“We have a plan to meet … before Christmas. We did not yet set a date but we will meet in Yangon,” said Khun Okkar, a senior member of the National Ceasefire Coordination Team, which represents an alliance of 16 ethnic armed groups.

The meeting will be an important moment for the sides to assess if they can resolve the fallout of a Burma Army surprise attack on the Kachin Independence Army (KIA) on Nov. 19, when the military fired a number of artillery rounds into the grounds of a KIA training camp near Laiza where dozens of young cadets were exercising.

The attack injured more than a dozen cadets and killed 23, most of them from rebel groups allied to the KIA, such as the Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA) and the Arakan Army.

The KIA subsequently cancelled its monthly meetings in Myitkyina with the Burma Army and alleged the army had not made an effort to properly explain the attack.

Khun Okkar said the NCCT expected answers over the attack from Aung Min and army representatives during the upcoming meeting, adding that the minister had only touched upon the incident in a recent letter to the NCCT.

“He gave some explanations in his letter, but not enough. We are not satisfied with his statement. Therefore, we decided to have a meeting as we wanted to talk more about this,” Khun Okkar said. “We will ask more questions and negotiate with them [about the nationwide ceasefire] at the meeting.”

Tensions in northern Burma have risen since the attack, and clashes between the army and Kachin, Palaung and Kokang rebels have become increasingly frequent. In recent months, the nationwide ceasefire process had already hit a deadlock as differences over key issues, such as political autonomy for ethnic regions, could not be bridged.

Khun Oo Reh, vice-chairman of the Karenni National Progressive Party and a NCCT member, said the government and army were obliged to offer an explanation for last month’s deadly attack before the nationwide ceasefire process could resume.

“We could not ignore the case of killings in Laiza. We could not focus only having meeting without solving the case of killings. We need to find a solution for this,” he said.

“For our ethnics’ side… I feel that we made a lot of compromises with them already, which cannot do that anymore” after the attack, said Khun Oo Reh.

http://www.irrawaddy.org/burma/ethnic-alliance-meet-govt-discuss-attack-ceasefire.html

Read more...

Ethnic Armed Groups request Norwegian Foreign Minister that Humanitarian Aid be Provided Directly to the Refugees

Ethnic Armed Groups meet with Norway’s Foreign Minister Mr. Borge Brende in Pegu.

At a recent meeting with the Norwegian Foreign Minister Mr. Borege Brende, representatives from four ethnic armed groups requested that humanitarian aid be delivered directly to Burma’s refugees, according to Nai Win Hla, Domestic Affair Minister of the New Mon State Party (NMSP).

“Although [humanitarian] aid is provided to those living in conflict areas, the [Burmese] government actually receives more [aid] support, which does not make it to the people in need. It will be more effective if [humanitarian] aid is given directly to Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), instead of the government, to distribute to people in conflict areas,” said Nai Win Hla.

Nai Win Hla recounted that, at the meeting, the ethnic groups and Norwegian Foreign Minister discussed possible solutions for national peace talks and ceasefire agreements, as well as discussion surrounding recent attacks by government troops launched in ethnic areas, and ways in which such actions may affect ceasefire talks.

Identifying the NMSP’s position, Nai Win Hla stated that “from the NMSP’s standpoint, political dialogues should be held after the national ceasefire agreement is inked.”

Minister Borege Brende assured the ethnic groups that the Norwegian government would aid in finding appropriate methods to implement within peace talks, as well as help to find a solution for nationwide peace.

Norway and EU member states are urged to participate, as observers, in Burma’s peace talks.

NMSP, Karen National Union (KNU), Karenni National Union (KNU), the Karenni National Progressive Party (KNPP), and the Chin National Front (CNF) met with Minister Borege Brende on November 30th, in Pegu Capital.

According to the Radio Free Asia (RFA), the four ethnic groups requested that Minister Borege Brende host a tripartite talk in Norway between the Burmese government, the Burmese Tatmadaw (government army), and ethnic armed groups

Read more...

Not saving Thailand’s face: the backlash of police corruption in tourist murders

By James Austin Farrell

The Burmese workers accused of committing the Koh Tao murders at a press conference earlier this month. Pic: AP.

Confusion looms as to how much the British detectives soon to arrive in Thailand will be directly involved in the investigation of the Koh Tao murders.

At first it seemed to be quite a lot, according to reports in the British press, but shortly thereafter Thai Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan was quoted in the Bangkok Postas saying that the British police would have “no direct role” in the investigation. Those following the investigation, including the family and friends of the victims, are perhaps rightly concerned about the nuances of passive/active detective work.

This is not the first time British police have come to Thailand to join what seems like a shady investigation. British detectives carried out an investigation twelve years after Kirsty Jones was brutally raped and murdered in Chiang Mai. The investigation, from the beginning, had been called “bizarre”, and included hackneyed Royal Thai Police tropes, such as scapegoats, tampered evidence, false statements, and a long line of unlikely suspects.

A few years after the Kirsty Jones murder in 2000 I interviewed a hilltribe man who had been used, unsuccessfully, as the scapegoat blamed for the murder of the Welsh girl. During the interview he told me the police, while torturing him, had said, “This is for Thailand”. It was his debt to the country, they told him, for being allowed to live here. His confession was for the greater good of the country.

While writing the same story, I also interviewed a Thai lawyer, Wirachai Wangkasemsuk, who had worked pro bono on the case of two Chinese Haw hilltribe men who had been tortured by police and confessed to the murder of an Australian man and attempted murder of his girlfriend while camping in Doi Angkhang, Northern Thailand, in 2000. The investigation, again, was bizarre, and astonishingly inhumane considering the plight of the accused. The two men were released years after their imprisonment, but no one was ever held accountable for the cover-up.

Wirachai told me in the interview, “I knew from the first time I saw the case that they were innocent. I also knew that at the time the police were under tremendous pressure to get an arrest. You must understand that it is not always the fault of the police, they are told from above that they must find the culprits as crimes like this look bad for Thailand and for tourism; so that is what they do, they find someone and get a confession.”

The case against the two men was diabolically flawed. There really wasn’t a case, just some very flimsy evidence, and a confession extracted after brutal torture, which of course in any ethical justice system would be entirely inadmissible. Although Thailand ratified the UN’s Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in 2007, the country has been criticized for inadequacies in adhering to the convention.

Before social media became omnipresent, this darker side of the Land of Smiles did not pose much of a problem for the tourism industry. Most people I talked to back then about such concerning incidents in the justice system were surprised, or just digested the material as anomalous, something that would never encroach into their lives.

Such cases were not international news, nor were they shared much between ‘friends’, even in Thailand. While the police hid behind their justification that cover-ups were for the greater good of the country – mainly the economy fueled by tourist money – even the fall-out ofbusted cover-ups at the time didn’t do that much damage due to the fact that few followed the cases.

These cases, however, have come back to bite Thailand in the exterior. The crime in Koh Tao, and the ongoing investigation, has become intrinsically linked to these past misdemeanors. History, as it does, has fashioned a reputation, and Thailand, or the Thai justice system, is now suffering its reputation.   

During a trip back to UK two weeks ago — my first trip back in 7 years — just about anyone I talked to about Thailand mentioned the ‘grisly’ murders in Koh Tao, and just about everyone held the view – likely learned via social media – that the two Burmese men were part of a cover-up. Because, they suggested, that’s what the police do in Thailand. The actions of the police during those investigations were, we are led to believe, to save the country’s face, but they’ve actually left it bloodied and broken. There’s a widely held belief that the current investigation has been corrupted.

Saving the country’s face might have been delusional, an outdated reflex, or perhaps it was just an excuse proffered to save big men from criminal culpability; action not for the greater good, but to support a few bad men.

And those bad men may kill again.

This is what the parents of Leo Del Pinto understood after their son’s killer murdered another victim.

Del Pinto was a young Canadian man shot dead in Pai in 2008 by a local Thai policeman. The police had threatened witnesses and “whitewashed” the murder investigation, and the man accused of the murder was released. Two years later, he beat his pregnant, 19-year-old Thai girlfriend to death. With the help of Thailand’s Human Rights Commission, he was finally charged with Del Pinto’s murder in 2013. I was in court with the murderer — and Del Pinto’s parents — when the judge read, “This not only caused damage to the victim, but has damaged the nation.”

To even mention the nation in the same breath must have felt like an insult to the grieving parents. When the father of the victim was asked if he felt justice had been served, he replied, “It has been very challenging navigating the system. A court date would be set, then moved, then set again, we went through years of this before we got to today.” I don’t think many of us in court that day thought justice had been served; I think our feelings were more along the lines that justice was flawed, and had been forced into submission.

A lot rests on the outcome of the Koh Tao investigation. How much more face can Thailand lose before tourists lose the confidence to come here? In the unlikely event that the two Burmese men are proven to be innocent, or the even less likely event that someone makes themselves accountable for a cover-up, then Thailand’s reputation, and economy, will suffer. If the Burmese men are convicted without a thorough impartial investigation, then Thailand’s reputation, and economy, will suffer. This is a debt to past inequities.

It’s a tough place for Thailand to be: a developing nation under first world scrutiny, grafting modernity to its rugged past. If the current government, or a government that proceeds it, sincerely embraces reform, then one would think, in the interests of the greater good, it might start with how law and justice is served. If this is not a foremost concern, then the country is its own enemy. While recent poll results revealed Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has ‘lifted Thailand’s image’ in the eyes of the world, such spoon-fed findings will do little to shake off an image cast by events mentioned in this article.

About the author:
James Austin Farrell is a British national who has been based in Thailand for 15 years. He was the former editor of Chiang Mai CityNews.

Siam VoicesPosts by Saksith Saiyasombut & Siam Voices

Thailand’s Collaborative Blog

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/siamvoices/

Read more...