
Inge Sargent: From Burmese princess to human rights activist - curtis
http://myhero.com/hero.asp?hero=Inge_Sargent
======
sufiyan
Welcome to Burma - the land of the Rohingya genocide.

~~~
programmertote
The situation is more complicated than what we usually read in western media,
and sources for those news are either people from NGOs or self-acclaimed
activists from Myanmar in the western world who have never set foot in the
region.

My understanding is that the Rohingyas are migrants from Bangladesh (with a
densely-packed population of over 150m). The label Rohingya itself is fairly
recent and it represents anyone who looks like a non-native in that region
(because the majority ethnic group there is Rakkhine and they are fairer-
skinned than the ones migrated from Bangladesh, who look more like people from
India or South Asia). They speak Chittagong, which is a local dialect of
Bangladesh as well. But they have been slowly migrating into Myanmar since
early 1900s (the borders are porous and the enforcement of legal settlement is
non-existent especially for a poor country like Myanmar) and have accrued in
numbers over the years. Unfortunately, a few guys from the migrant community
raped and murdered a local girl from Rakkhine ethnic group a few years back (I
think, it was in 2012). Because of that, the tension between the locals and
the migrants rose to an unprecedented level, resulting in people being killed
on both sides. But because Rakkhines are the majority, their casualty is
significantly lower. The current Myanmar government invited a UN panel, led by
former UN chief Kofi Anan, to assess the situation and give recommendations.
Their findings and recommendations just came out recently [1] and their report
is quite mild and does not mention observation of any violence (or ethnic
cleansing) against Rohingyas in the region like some western media usually
portrays.

Think about it this way: what if the US's economy is as big/poor as Myanmar
and yet over a million people (with very different religious and cultural
background) from an overpopulated neighbor (say, Mexico with significantly
smaller land area) migrated to the US. In addition to that, the migrants want
to be granted citizenship as well as be given an autonomous region to protect
themselves from the natives, how would you handle that? Not even a country, as
resourceful as the United States, can deal with the migrant issue properly at
the moment. So, it is really a tall task for Myanmar government and people
living in the country.

Finally, please keep in mind that the NGOs (including the UNGOs) aren't the
most trustworthy sources of news. The people from NGO need budgets and
donations from parties of interest, and it is sometimes good for them to keep
things, at least, exaggerated to make sure the funding keeps flowing in (I
interned at Save The Children and World Concern for a total of about 5 months
in Myanmar; I also have friends who have worked or are still working in INGOs
in Myanmar and they've told me of the conflict of interest that the NGOs
usually have in such issues). There are also self-acclaimed "activists" from
Myanmar (including some Rohingyas themselves), who give interviews to the
western media and cries about the purported sufferings of minorities so that
they can claim asylums in other countries (e.g., the United States and the
Europe ). I say that because I know a LOT of people from Myanmar in the US
(two lives in the house that I currently live; one of them used to work as a
logistic person for UN for more than three years and she had worked in
Rakkhine on the Rohingya issue) who have already filed for their asylum-ship
related to ethnic strifes despite the fact that they came from middle class
families and were never persecuted as such is claimed in their asylum
applications. But in preparing for their asylum-ship application, they
participate in protests and events related to Rohingyas and other minorities
to make sure they get the photographic evidence of their participation in the
issue.

Long story short, the issue is not as black and white (Rakkhine people bad,
Rohingyas oppressed) as you'd read in the news. As most things in life, there
are more than one side to the issue.

[1] [http://www.reuters.com/article/us-myanmar-rohingya-annan-
idU...](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-myanmar-rohingya-annan-
idUSKBN16N1J6)

~~~
sufiyan
This is from a few weeks back - [http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-
murder-of-an-hon...](http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-murder-of-an-
honorable-lawyer-in-myanmar)

I accept it is not black and white and it is all shades of grey, however as
you point out these are people who have been around from before the concept of
citizenship became rigidly enforced. Now, to them this world however horrible
it is to them is their reality and it is where they were born and raised and
call their home - it is not like how you portray the US and Mexico but more
nuanced. Lets say any immigrant had a kid in the US, that kid doesn't know of
any reality except the one he/she was born into, so is your hypothesis that
everyone in the US has lived on it for the last 500 years? Most if not all
made their way in through porous borders. So, by your logic, everyone should
have lived in their own place - which by your logical conclusion means US is
an illegal state because it is not ruled by the Native Americans who are
technically the people who lived there from long back.

