PDA

View Full Version : Rohingyas issue is similar to India's Kashmir issue : Aung San Suu Kyi



UN talkz
7th September 2017, 19:36
Yangon: Equating Rohingya Muslims issue in the Rakhine state with India's Kashmir issue, Myanmar's State Councillor Aung San Suu Kyi on Thursday said there is a similarity between Rohingya and Kashmir issue.

Suu Kyi said, "We are facing the same problem as India is facing in Kashmir".

"We have to take care of innocent citizens as our resources are not as adequate as required, but we try our best and make ensure that every citizen is entitled to the protection of law," she added.

Elaborating on the difficulties her government is facing, Suu Kyi said, "We have to think about how to differentiate between terrorists and innocent people.
You in India are well-versed with this, because India has a large Muslim community and in place like Kashmir, where you face terrorism, the trouble of sorting out the terrorists from the innocent citizen and all those who are not involved in the terrorist movement at all, comes up."

Suu Kyi further said that the issue of the Rohingya Muslims is one of the biggest challenges, dating back to pre-colonial times and hence, will take time to be resolved.

"The issue [Rohingya Muslims] is one of the biggest challenges Myanmar has to face, because you know that the situation in Rakhine has been difficult for many decades and infact it goes right back to pre-colonial times," Suu Kyi told ANI.

She added, "It is a little unreasonable to expect that the issue can be resolved in 18 months as you know that our administration has been in power for the last 18 months."

The state councillor said that her government is trying to progess on the development front, which is one of the 'biggest problems' as the matter is "we have very limited resources".

Suu Kyi said, "We are implementing recommendations given by former U.N. secretary-general Kofi Annan as quickly as possible to create harmony and peace in the Rakhine state. Our recommendation is harmony and we shall be addressing it quickly."

"A commission led by former U.N. secretary-general Kofi Annan has recommended economic development and social justice to counter the deadly violence between Buddhists and Muslims in the Rakhine state," she added.

Earlier, Prime Minister Modi had earlier said that India shares Myanmar's concern on extremist violence in the Rakhine state and that he hopes that all stakeholders can find a solution, in which the unity and the territorial integrity of the country is maintained, together.

Suu Kyi thanked Prime Minister for taking a strong stand on the terror threat that Myanmar faced and assured India that 'terror would not be allowed to take roots in her country.'

"Together both countries will ensure that terror is not allowed to take roots in our country," de-facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi said.

"We would like to thank India for the strong stand that it has taken with regard to the terrorist threat that came to our country," said Aung San Suu Kyi, to which Prime Minister Modi responded that "India completely understands the challenges." (ANI)

https://www.kashmirmonitor.in/Details/131635/rohingyas-issue-is-similar-to-indias-kashmir-issuesuu-kyi

troodon
7th September 2017, 19:47
Kashmiris are natives are Kashmir. Rohingyas are immigrants from Bangladesh.

India is not driving Kashmiris out of Kashmir. Myanmar is kicking out every single Rohingya out of Burma.

I don't see any similarities between them. India has hard time separating innocent civilians from Terrorists. Hence you often see innocent Kashmirs getting killed for none of their mistake. Not sure what Miss Kyi is on about.

Other than both Kashmiris and Rohingyas are Muslims, there is no similarity IMO.

Gabbar Singh
7th September 2017, 19:55
Kashmiris are natives are Kashmir. Rohingyas are immigrants from Bangladesh.

The Rohingya's have been in the Rakhine region long before Bangladesh (or even East Pakistan) came into existence.

UN talkz
7th September 2017, 20:16
Kashmiris are natives are Kashmir. Rohingyas are immigrants from Bangladesh.

India is not driving Kashmiris out of Kashmir. Myanmar is kicking out every single Rohingya out of Burma.

I don't see any similarities between them. India has hard time separating innocent civilians from Terrorists. Hence you often see innocent Kashmirs getting killed for none of their mistake. Not sure what Miss Kyi is on about.

Other than both Kashmiris and Rohingyas are Muslims, there is no similarity IMO.

lol... what a line that is.

troodon
7th September 2017, 20:20
The Rohingya's have been in the Rakhine region long before Bangladesh (or even East Pakistan) came into existence.

From what I read, Rohingyas did not exist in Rakhine prior to British. It was Burmese territory.

troodon
7th September 2017, 20:22
lol... what a line that is.

How do you separate innocent civilians from a bunch of terrorists? Terrorists do not carry a flag.

India wants Kashmiris to be Indians and be part of India. Myanmar wants Rohingyas to get the heck out of Burma.

I see No similarity between the 2 issues.

UN talkz
7th September 2017, 21:57
How do you separate innocent civilians from a bunch of terrorists? Terrorists do not carry a flag.

India wants Kashmiris to be Indians and be part of India. Myanmar wants Rohingyas to get the heck out of Burma.

I see No similarity between the 2 issues.

There never have been more than 300 militants active at a same time since 1990... and 50000 civilians have been killed since 90... and that is too much.. had it been a rare thing, nobody would have talked abt it... a 500 civilians are killed to every militant killed... look at the ratio bro...

Zaz
7th September 2017, 22:08
How she can continue with this diabolical list of excuses and denial is beyond me Does she think the world is full of stupid people?

Stewie
7th September 2017, 22:24
Of course it's similar.. in both cases Muslims are being victimized and human rights are being violated!!

cricketjoshila
7th September 2017, 22:29
From what I read, Rohingyas did not exist in Rakhine prior to British. It was Burmese territory.

Same what i have read.

Gabbar Singh
7th September 2017, 22:46
From what I read, Rohingyas did not exist in Rakhine prior to British. It was Burmese territory.


Same what i have read.

They were encouraged to migrate to the area by the British in the late 1800s/early 1900s however there were some already in the region since the 1400s.

To refer to them as immigrants would be like referring to Indo-Fijians or the Indo-Guyanese as immigrants. Sure at one stage they were but 100+ years on it's unfair to suggest they are still immigrants imo. The Burmese need to accept them.

90MPH
7th September 2017, 22:57
They were encouraged to migrate to the area by the British in the late 1800s/early 1900s however there were some already in the region since the 1400s.

To refer to them as immigrants would be like referring to Indo-Fijians or the Indo-Guyanese as immigrants. Sure at one stage they were but 100+ years on it's unfair to suggest they are still immigrants imo. The Burmese need to accept them.

Well said.

Using the word Immigrants is another way of saying these people are not native to the land so it's upto the state to accept them or not.

People need to watch the news and videos - these are desperately poor and vulnerable people. They have been tossed away like rubbish for far too long.

cricketjoshila
7th September 2017, 23:25
They were encouraged to migrate to the area by the British in the late 1800s/early 1900s however there were some already in the region since the 1400s.

To refer to them as immigrants would be like referring to Indo-Fijians or the Indo-Guyanese as immigrants. Sure at one stage they were but 100+ years on it's unfair to suggest they are still immigrants imo. The Burmese need to accept them.

The Rohingyas speak a dialect of Modern bengali.A language that came into being only in 19th century.

The proto and middle bengali isnt spoken any more.


So they are immigrants but their status was changed in 1978 by Military Junta.There was violence between the indigenious buddhists and Rohingyas.The military junta made the Rohingyas illegal immigrant then by changing citizenship rules.

Slog
7th September 2017, 23:30
From what I read, Rohingyas did not exist in Rakhine prior to British. It was Burmese territory.

Once youve been in a land long enough you are native to that (and I would think several generations should be enough)

Otherwise you do know that most by most theories only Dravidians are native to India

cricketjoshila
7th September 2017, 23:43
Once youve been in a land long enough you are native to that (and I would think several generations should be enough)

Otherwise you do know that most by most theories only Dravidians are native to India

The aryan invasion theory as proposed by British historians have been debunked many times.

Anyways FYI the Aryans came to the Indian SC more than 3000years.

GBK_Fan
8th September 2017, 00:06
Once youve been in a land long enough you are native to that (and I would think several generations should be enough)

Otherwise you do know that most by most theories only Dravidians are native to India

So you agree with Israels existence?

Pakistanian
8th September 2017, 00:08
The aryan invasion theory as proposed by British historians have been debunked many times.

Anyways FYI the Aryans came to the Indian SC more than 3000years.

and your point is? The Rohingyas have been there since the 1800s, they aren't "recent" immigrants, that's as long as Europeans have been in America and Australia. People from all over south asia have migrated to other places because of british rule so justifying the genocide of any community because of it makes no sense. It's funny you support their genocide under the theory that they're "immigrants" - apparently being born and raised in a country and having been there for generations still makes you an immigrant. Would you support the same actions towards indian immigrants in America? Or towards Indians in south Africa and kenya and Fiji?

Pakistanian
8th September 2017, 00:13
It's ironic that Indians at supporting the genocide of the rohingyas just cause they descend from immigrants who settled Burma during British rule. Indians immigrate all over the world, before the British there were no Indians in Kenya, Fiji, South Africa and the Caribbean, so would that justify their genocide and expulsion? Would Indians be happy if all the indian immigrants in Singapore and Malaysia were deported to India despite being there for generations only cause they aren't "native"?

Pakistanian
8th September 2017, 00:16
The Rohingyas speak a dialect of Modern bengali.A language that came into being only in 19th century.

The proto and middle bengali isnt spoken any more.


So they are immigrants but their status was changed in 1978 by Military Junta.There was violence between the indigenious buddhists and Rohingyas.The military junta made the Rohingyas illegal immigrant then by changing citizenship rules.
So if they're Bengali then you should accept them in your land since they're you're ethnic kin. Afterall you have more in common with them racially and culturally than you do with a Punjabi or a Kashmir no matter how much you would like.

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 00:38
So if they're Bengali then you should accept them in your land since they're you're ethnic kin. Afterall you have more in common with them racially and culturally than you do with a Punjabi or a Kashmir no matter how much you would like.

The homeland of muslim bengalis isnt India.The muslim bengalis choose to create a separate homeland in 1947.

And

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 00:39
and your point is? The Rohingyas have been there since the 1800s, they aren't "recent" immigrants, that's as long as Europeans have been in America and Australia. People from all over south asia have migrated to other places because of british rule so justifying the genocide of any community because of it makes no sense. It's funny you support their genocide under the theory that they're "immigrants" - apparently being born and raised in a country and having been there for generations still makes you an immigrant. Would you support the same actions towards indian immigrants in America? Or towards Indians in south Africa and kenya and Fiji?

Tell that to the military Junta of Myanmar.Indians have nothing to do with Rohingyas in Myanmar.And i want it to stay that way,that is India to be far away from any internal problems of Myanmar.

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 00:42
It's ironic that Indians at supporting the genocide of the rohingyas just cause they descend from immigrants who settled Burma during British rule. Indians immigrate all over the world, before the British there were no Indians in Kenya, Fiji, South Africa and the Caribbean, so would that justify their genocide and expulsion? Would Indians be happy if all the indian immigrants in Singapore and Malaysia were deported to India despite being there for generations only cause they aren't "native"?

Whether Indian immigrants of Kenya fiji SA carribean Singapore or malaysia are citizens of that country or not will be decided by those countries.India doesnt feature into that. The present day India has nothing to do with what British India did.

As an Indian i absolutely want India to stay away from poking its nose in any problems of Myanmar and toe the line it has been for decades.Its a problem of Myanmar people and its for them to handle.

sshakir411
8th September 2017, 01:03
The Rohingya's have been in the Rakhine region long before Bangladesh (or even East Pakistan) came into existence.

You're correct.

Slog
8th September 2017, 01:45
So you agree with Israels existence?

Haha yea. Why?

Slog
8th September 2017, 01:46
Whether Indian immigrants of Kenya fiji SA carribean Singapore or malaysia are citizens of that country or not will be decided by those countries.India doesnt feature into that. The present day India has nothing to do with what British India did.

As an Indian i absolutely want India to stay away from poking its nose in any problems of Myanmar and toe the line it has been for decades.Its a problem of Myanmar people and its for them to handle.



What will be your reaction if Trinidad decided that Indio-carribeans are immigrants and need to be kicked out?

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 01:50
What will be your reaction if Trinidad decided that Indio-carribeans are immigrants and need to be kicked out?

I will want India to stay away from that issue and not get involved in it. we have 1.25bn Indians residing in India and have their problems to address. Getting your nose into problems of other countries at end gives you a bloody nose. Mind India first the rest of the world can wait.

Hamare Apne Masle Sulajhte nahi, Duniya ki Thekedaari karne ka waqt nahi hai.

GBK_Fan
8th September 2017, 01:53
Haha yea. Why?
Didn't know that considering the usual vitriol we see being spewed here :-)

Markhor
8th September 2017, 01:56
From what I read, Rohingyas did not exist in Rakhine prior to British. It was Burmese territory.


Same what i have read.

I'm not sure what sources you've been reading but that's incorrect.

Rohingya community has existed in Myanmar for centuries. There were Bengali settlements in Rakhine state (called Arakan then) as early as the 15th Century before the colonial era. The Bengal Sultanate ruled Arakan for years. Infact there were some Bengali Muslims in the administrations of the Arakanese Buddhist kings after winning independence from the Sultanate.

What's true is there was large scale migration under British rule from British India, especially Bengal, and Rakhine state had the largest migrant population.

After independence in 1948 they were recognised as an indigenous minority - it was the 1982 Citizenship Act under General Ne Win that took away their citizenship. The extreme Buddhist nationalists deny the Rohingyas ever were an indigenous ethnic minority and label them "illegal immigrants" as they want an ethnically pure Rakhine state.

Slog
8th September 2017, 02:05
I'm not sure what sources you've been reading but that's incorrect.

Rohingya community has existed in Myanmar for centuries. There were Bengali settlements in Rakhine state (called Arakan then) as early as the 15th Century before the colonial era. The Bengal Sultanate ruled Arakan for years. Infact there were some Bengali Muslims in the administrations of the Arakanese Buddhist kings after winning independence from the Sultanate.

What's true is there was large scale migration under British rule from British India, especially Bengal, and Rakhine state had the largest migrant population.

After independence in 1948 they were recognised as an indigenous minority - it was the 1982 Citizenship Act under General Ne Win that took away their citizenship. The extreme Buddhist nationalists deny the Rohingyas ever were an indigenous ethnic minority and label them "illegal immigrants" as they want an ethnically pure Rakhine state.

so 'ethnically' Rohingyas are Bengali?

Anyways for me its a moot point. In Karachi there are are ethnic Pathans who classify themselves as Urdu speaking. Their ancestors migrated to Lucknow, Agra etc (basically UP) during early time of Mughals (around 1700s). They were there since then and migrated to Karachi when Pakistan became independent. So while still Pathan technically it would be ridiculous to term them as such and they dont identify as such. Dont know a word of Pashto and literally have no link to Pashtun culture. From your explanation I sense this is the same with Rohingyas in regards to being Bengalis. Another example would be calling African Americans (since slavery times) as being from West Africa.

big_gamer007
8th September 2017, 02:51
U.N. seems pretty crappy organisation can't they just give Myanmar annual money to take care of Rohingya and over a period of next 15-20 years these Rohingya people would start contributing to the society in a positive manner?

Pakistanian
8th September 2017, 05:32
Tell that to the military Junta of Myanmar.Indians have nothing to do with Rohingyas in Myanmar.And i want it to stay that way,that is India to be far away from any internal problems of Myanmar.

Genocide and abuse are now "internal issues"?!?!

Pakistanian
8th September 2017, 05:34
The homeland of muslim bengalis isnt India.The muslim bengalis choose to create a separate homeland in 1947.

And

So you're saying that your indian nationalist friends who claim that the "two nation theory" failed after the separation of east Pakistan are actually incorrect?! looool You guys contradict yourself with your lies.

Pakistanian
8th September 2017, 05:35
Whether Indian immigrants of Kenya fiji SA carribean Singapore or malaysia are citizens of that country or not will be decided by those countries.India doesnt feature into that. The present day India has nothing to do with what British India did.

As an Indian i absolutely want India to stay away from poking its nose in any problems of Myanmar and toe the line it has been for decades.Its a problem of Myanmar people and its for them to handle.

I see, it's blind nationalism over humanity for you and your kind.

PakLFC
8th September 2017, 06:09
She is right as both people are being innocently killed but the fight will continue. Bangladesh is morally obliged to help the Rohingya people. Most Bangladeshis are happy to assist them but that pro Indian Hasina is the problem.

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 07:19
Genocide and abuse are now "internal issues"?!?!

Issues inside the sovereign border of a country are internal.If some other country wants to get involved they can.

India should totally avoid getting into others problems.

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 07:20
I see, it's blind nationalism over humanity for you and your kind.

You are free to decide what course you want your country to take.Spare mine.

JaDed
8th September 2017, 12:23
Americans talking about humanity and genocide, half the world wishes America stopped interfering in their issues.

Doesn't Pakistan support Sinhalese agression against Tamils ? IIRC Pakistan has Lanka's back even against UN war crime probe.

the Great Khan
8th September 2017, 14:18
The Rohingyas speak a dialect of Modern bengali.A language that came into being only in 19th century.

The proto and middle bengali isnt spoken any more.


So they are immigrants but their status was changed in 1978 by Military Junta.There was violence between the indigenious buddhists and Rohingyas.The military junta made the Rohingyas illegal immigrant then by changing citizenship rules.

so you agree with the murder and burning of villages? People do not flee if they feel safe. And stop beating about the bush. Do you agree with what the burmese govt is doing in Rakhine?

the Great Khan
8th September 2017, 14:19
Americans talking about humanity and genocide, half the world wishes America stopped interfering in their issues.

Doesn't Pakistan support Sinhalese agression against Tamils ? IIRC Pakistan has Lanka's back even against UN war crime probe.

do you support the burmese govt?

the Great Khan
8th September 2017, 14:19
Genocide and abuse are now "internal issues"?!?!

except in 1971 when it became an external issue for them. Oh how things change. Hypocrites.

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 14:38
except in 1971 when it became an external issue for them. Oh how things change. Hypocrites.

More than 10mn Bangladeshis flooded into India and literally broke the back of bengal economy.The border was porous there was no way India could handle such massive influx of refugees.

Also Pakistan declared war by launching OP Chengiz Khan.Indian troops didnot enter Pakistani territory before that.

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 14:39
so you agree with the murder and burning of villages? People do not flee if they feel safe. And stop beating about the bush. Do you agree with what the burmese govt is doing in Rakhine?

Where did i say i support burning and killing of innocent people?

shah_1
8th September 2017, 15:12
This guy is just like Hitler, he doesn't see Muslims as human.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvEBaAiy5b4

JaDed
8th September 2017, 15:17
do you support the burmese govt?

Of course not,and Suu Kyi is a politician,she tried to be democracatic for her legacy,not my fault people expected more from her.

Only Nelson Mandela is the greatest of em all,who had the ability to forgive and think like a statesman.

Surely Nato and it's citizens should be apologetic about all the mess they have caused from Libya to Afghanistan.

the Great Khan
8th September 2017, 15:46
More than 10mn Bangladeshis flooded into India and literally broke the back of bengal economy.The border was porous there was no way India could handle such massive influx of refugees.

Also Pakistan declared war by launching OP Chengiz Khan.Indian troops didnot enter Pakistani territory before that.

actually they did but thats a whole another debate. This situation is rapidly escalating to that level.

the Great Khan
8th September 2017, 15:47
Of course not,and Suu Kyi is a politician,she tried to be democracatic for her legacy,not my fault people expected more from her.

Only Nelson Mandela is the greatest of em all,who had the ability to forgive and think like a statesman.

Surely Nato and it's citizens should be apologetic about all the mess they have caused from Libya to Afghanistan.

then perhaps you should say so because at the moment every Indian internet user I come across seems to be justifying or apologising for the burmese. Either I hear" well their immigrants" or "well its an internal matter" and so forth.

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 16:16
actually they did but thats a whole another debate. This situation is rapidly escalating to that level.

With all due respect to your concerns and what is happening in Rakhine, there is nothing India can do about it. India surely isnt going to get involved in this and burn its hands.

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 16:18
then perhaps you should say so because at the moment every Indian internet user I come across seems to be justifying or apologising for the burmese. Either I hear" well their immigrants" or "well its an internal matter" and so forth.

Why should India get involved in this?You know what happens when you get involved in matters of a neighbouring country?Pakistan knows what happens and India should stay miles away from such situations.

Cpt. Rishwat
8th September 2017, 18:32
Why should India get involved in this?You know what happens when you get involved in matters of a neighbouring country?Pakistan knows what happens and India should stay miles away from such situations.

India does get involved in matters of neighbouring countries. All the time.

troodon
8th September 2017, 19:33
then perhaps you should say so because at the moment every Indian internet user I come across seems to be justifying or apologising for the burmese. Either I hear" well their immigrants" or "well its an internal matter" and so forth.

Rohinhya is Burma's internal matter. India will do well not to interfere in this. No need to antagonize your neighbor. All of this considering Chinese threat.

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 19:52
India does get involved in matters of neighbouring countries. All the time.

No.Not till that issue spills over into India or starts affecting Indians.

Muhammad10
8th September 2017, 23:01
No.Not till that issue spills over into India or starts affecting Indians.

I thought the Rohingya refugees were affecting India, which is why you wanted them to be deported (IIRC). You certainly seemed to consider their growing number an issue given India's inability to take in more refugees, so you can't say their persecution is not affecting India in any way.

pakistanigoneaussie
8th September 2017, 23:10
From what I read, Rohingyas did not exist in Rakhine prior to British. It was Burmese territory.

read again

Muslims have lived in Burma since the 11th century, they were the forebearers of the modern day Rohingya

cricketjoshila
8th September 2017, 23:16
I thought the Rohingya refugees were affecting India, which is why you wanted them to be deported (IIRC). You certainly seemed to consider their growing number an issue given India's inability to take in more refugees, so you can't say their persecution is not affecting India in any way.

India has already closed down its borders and not allowing refugees.

Its already in the procedure of deporting 50k Rohingyas we already have.All the more reason we should keep our relations with Myanmar healthy.