- Stars (0)
Identity Crisis: Citizenship and Myanmar’s Muslim Ethnic Group
By Mussarat Jabeen — Ph.D & HoD of Department of IR & Pol Science, University of Lahore, Sargodha Campus, Pakistan.
Myanmar is one of the most culturally and ethnically diverse state in the world, with almost 135 ethnic groups. Owing to this diversity, the country has been suffering with multiple internal ethnic armed conflicts, including the Rohingys-Rakhine conflict. The Rohingya, a Muslim ethnic group of Myanma, was not included in the officially recognized groups of Myanmar at the time of independence in 1948. They migrated from neighbouring states at that time of history when borders were not demarcated and people frequently move from one place to another. The democratic setup of Burma (1948-62) maintained peace and harmony, but the military regime victimized the ethnic groups, including the Rohingya with its brutal policies forcing a huge number of people to flee into other countries.
Above it, the 1982 Citizenship Law did not grant citizenship to the Rohingya as a recognized ethnic group with ties to Myanmar prior to 1824 (the year when Arakan (Rakhine) came under British occupation) and this law confirmed their statelessness. In the current situation, they have become alien as the major ethnic group and the Rakhine Buddhists are forcing them to flee to Bangladesh labeling them “illegal Bengali migrants.” Most of the Rohingyas found it difficult to apply for naturalizing citizenship in the absence of documents that are required as proof of their long-term stay in the country. Above it, they do not speak any of the Burmese language. Losing the status, they have become subject to persecution and discrimination. By law, they require travel permits to visit other countries. The military regime refused to accept back the refugees demanding proofs of ’genuine citizens.’ In this age of globalization, there is talk of the world without borders, but group like Rohingya reminds us the importance of national borders and the rights of citizenship. There is very little attention paid in World Politics to the plight of such „stateless‟ groups and solution to their problem. The central thesis of this paper is that assimilation of Roghina into Myanmar is made all the more difficult because they are made out to be just as Bengali and „foreigners‟ and secondly the religious colouring has been given to the conflict, highlighting the Muslim character of Roghinga and active involvement of the Buddhist monks in inciting riots against Roghinga are two dynamics that make the future of Roghinga grim in Myanmar.
For the post-colonial societies the process of nation-making is extremely complex. Most of them became a „nation-state‟ overnight, but what is the essence of the „nation‟ contained in these states continues to be a vexing question. For the multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-cultural societies like Myanmar, those groups who are not imagined to be part of the „nation‟ can face great hardships. The distance between different ethnic groups is further widened when any regime attempts to apply a nation-building process based on the idea of “one religion, one language, and one ethnicity” using coercive methods for absorption of various elements. The nation-building belongs to “subjective values that cannot be shared objectively, but differentiate one group of people from another.” Thus, in this position, the concept of nation-building is “hostile to multiculturalism and diversity” (Saunder, 2003, p. 198). The situation becomes serious, creating humanitarian problems when any ethnic group is deprived of citizenship rights despite living in the land for several centuries.
Myanmar remained under the military rule for most of the time after its independence on January 4, 1948. In earlier years, democratic setup of Burma enhanced its international status and a Burmese national, U Thant became the first non-Westerner secretary general of the United Nations. However, the assassination of General Aung San and removal of civilian government by the military in a coup d‟état in 1962 headed by General Ne Win converted the country into a police state. General occupied the government for the next 26 years (Nakanishi, 2013).
Chin and other non-Burman races viewed state‟s religion bill not only as an ethnic issue, but also a constitutional problem. They thought that “tyranny of the majority” was justified through the constitution. General Ne Win (1962-1988), the successor of U Nu, introduced the national language policy of Myanmar-batha-ska calling it a source of harmony among the different national races. Following these practices, the successive military regime instrumented ethnicity by imposing Myanmar-lumyo for the national unity. All these steps indicated that nation building was simply based on the notion of “one ethnicity, one language and one religion” (Sakhong, 2012, p. 3).
In July 1989, the military regime renamed the country as Myanmar with the argument that it was more suitable for the ethnic minorities as compared to Burma, which was perceived as a reflection of British colonization. It was also stated that the change of name was to create more indigenousness among the people, and Myanmar was not a mirror to the Burmans alone, but a collective identity of all people (Leslie, 2007). About it, Matthews wrote (2001, p. 1), “Myanmar has a long and distinguished use among the majority Burmese or BaMa (Bamar) peoples, the term of choice used for generations when referring to their own sense of collective identity.” However, ethnic division remained and changed name did not create unity as it was not a new practice. In 1948, Burma became the Union of Burma shedding the name of Burma, a district of the British colony. In 1974, the constitution renamed it as Socialist Republican of the Union of Burma and ultimately it became Myanmar. The United States and the United Kingdom refused to accept the changed name, but at the same time, they extended legitimacy to the military regime of Burma, ignoring its human rights’ violation and increasing narcotics trafficking (Pattison, 2012). Among other ethnic conflicts, Rakhine-Rohingya conflict is one of those disputes, which is taking the lives of thousands of people and making them homeless. According to one viewpoint, the conflict is simply hidden in cultural and religious differences, such as Buddhism versus Islam while others opine that it is an inter-communal dispute between the two groups of Rakhine State.
The term “Rohingya” is used for the Muslims (Sunni) living in Arakan State, which has been designated as Rakhine State in 1989 after the name of the major ethnic group living in the area. The Rohingya Muslims are the inhabitants of northwestern part of Myanmar, which shares borders with Bangladesh and India.The majority of Rohingya Muslims have been living in three townships named Maungdaw, Buthidaung and Rathedaung. Like other ethnic minorities, the Rohingyas are also living in mountainous frontiers, on a line dividing Islamic and Buddhist areas. They are 1.3 million in number. Their miserable condition is recognized by the United Nations and its High Commissioner for Refugees called them the most victimized and persecuted people in the world. Medecins Sans Frontiers (2010) had presented the same picture of their plight.
