Speaking on Myanmar Genocide of Rohingyas, The Oxford Union Genocide Panel, 29 Jan 2018

Saying "Sorry!" to a Rohingya brother who survived Myanmar Genocide, Kutupalong Camp, Bangladesh, 7 Nov 2017.

Speaking on the Slow Burning Genocide of Rohingyas in Burma, with Professor Amartya Sen, Harvard University, Nov 2014

N. Ireland peace activist Mairead Maguire presenting Zarni with the Cultivation of Harmony Award on behalf of the Parliament of the World's Religions, Salt Lake City, USA 18 Oct 2015

Meeting with The Minister of Foreign Affairs Rt. Honourable Abul Hassan Mahmood Ali, M.P., State Guest House, Dhaka, 4 Nov 2017

"National Traitor and Enemy of the State" for his opposition to Rohingya Genocide. Sun Rays, 16/9/17

Maung Zarni: Myanmar feels like a big cage for Rohingyas

Maung Zarni at the Oxford Union Genocide Panel on January 29, 2018 - Courtesy

By Rifat Islam Esha
February 19, 2018

Maung Zarni is a Myanmarese academic exiled in the UK who is an activist, commentator and expert on Myanmar. He is currently a scholar with the Documentation Centre of Cambodia at the Sleuk Rith Institute. In an exclusive interview with the Dhaka Tribune, he talks about the Rohingya repatriation to Myanmar which, he says, from the Myanmar army’s perspective is a tactical retreat in the face of heavy artillery of international condemnations, criticisms and reimposition of sanctions, and it might take around 10-20 years to complete

Over 688,000 Rohingya entered Bangladesh between August 25, 2017 and February 11, 2018, after Myanmar security forces launched a brutal crackdown against the mainly Muslim minority – following militant attacks on border outposts and an army base by insurgents.

As agreed between Bangladesh and Myanmar on November 23, the Rohingya repatriation process was supposed to start on January 23. However, it was delayed, and on Friday (February 16), Bangladesh handed over its first list of 1,673 Rohingya families (8,032 individuals) to Myanmar to start the first phase of repatriation to their homeland.

Do you think the Rohingya repatriation ever will take place?

Yes, the repatriation will take place because both Dhaka and Naypyidaw wants it. Dhaka wants it to take place because the pressure of 688,000 (in addition to the pre-existing Rohingya refugees from the previous waves since 1991) needs to be relieved and wants to set the new process of reducing the number of Rohingyas from its soil. Myanmar wants repatriation because it wants to show the world that its intention is not genocide or ethnic cleansing, and it has this mistaken belief that taking back the Rohingyas who survived the Myanmar troops’ mass-slaughter will make it difficult for the world to press charges of ethnic cleansing or genocide. As the former Governor of New Mexico Bill Richardson, the veteran US envoy and diplomat, said it openly: “Repatriation is a big whitewash,” of Myanmar’s international state crimes against Rohingya. From the Myanmar military’s perspective repatriation is a tactical retreat in the face of heavy artillery of international condemnations, criticisms and reimposition of sanctions.

How long do you think it might take?

Well, there are estimated one million Rohingyas who fit the textbook example of refugees – although Dhaka chose to invent its own term “displaced people of Myanmar,” even under the most conducive circumstances it will take 10-20 years, especially at the rate Myanmar side wants to receive.

Do you think the Rohingya people’s return will be “safe, voluntary and dignified”?

Absolutely not. I actually avoid that international mantra coming from INGOs, UN agencies and governments following Kofi Annan’s phraseology. How can the return ever be “safe, voluntary and dignified” for a million people whose physical, cultural, economic, social and intellectual existence, as a minority community has been completely and intentionally destroyed from its very foundations? Myanmar military burned nearly 350 villages systematically in a region stretching 100 kilometres within several months. Myanmar’s Commander in Chief Min Aung Hlaing viewed – and officially told the nation of anti-Rohingya racists – that the army is engaged in completing the “unfinished business” from the WWII. I will say the “finished business” is charred villages where any physical traces of Rohingyas are being bulldozed. Those thousands of Rohingya who still remain inside Myanmar today just told the Canadian Special Envoy to Myanmar, Bob Rae, last week that they feel like they are “in a big cage” where they have absolutely no freedom of movements for accessing food, medicine, jobs, etc. I want to ask those politicians and officials who spit out this mind-numbing delusional phrase, why they are knowingly pussyfooting around Myanmar’s blatant violations of the Genocide Convention – an inter-state treaty, and focusing on sending the Rohingya survivors back to what really is a vast complex of past and future concentration camps inside Myanmar.

What role can the UNHCR play?

UNHCR is primarily mandated to protect Rohingyas. Its leadership has been doing a good job, telling the Security Council – and the world at large – the unpalatable truth being that the conditions inside Myanmar are absolutely non-conducive to any form of return of Rohingyas. It should continue to discharge its main mission of protecting and promoting the well-being of the one million Rohingyas on Bangladeshi soil. It should persuade Dhaka to accept Rohingyas as legally defined refugees and genocide survivors – not simply “forcibly displaced persons from Myanmar.”

How much power does the military still have over the state and how much power does the government have to address this crisis?

The military has all the power to end the persecution of Rohingya. But the military will not cease the genocide because it has since late 1960’s institutionalized the eradication of Rohingyas from the group’s very foundations on the false, racist and paranoid ground that they are Bangladesh’s “proxy” Muslim population inside the strategic Western region. Suu Kyi’s civilian leadership shares these paranoid and anti-Muslim racist policies as well. The difference between the Myanmar generals and Suu Kyi government, particularly Suu Kyi herself, is not in kind, but in degree. This is the racist woman who cannot bring herself to respect the right of Rohingya to self-identify as Rohingya or cannot embrace the truth that Rohingyas are a part of Myanmarese society at large, despite her Oxford education and decades of life in liberal western societies. It’s no longer about whether if Suu Kyi had more power would she have been able to end it. The fact is whatever limited power the civilian government has it uses it to deny, dismiss and cover up the military’s crimes against humanity and genocide against Rohingyas. Remember, Suu Kyi has consistently praised the ethnic cleansing and Myanmar army for “doing a good job.”

How effective do you think are the recommendations made by the Advisory Commission?

Absolutely zero effect, despite the loud chorus of support from UN and government quarters for its recommendations. To start with, the military did not welcome Kofi Annan’s involvement from day one at all. It attempted to derail, block or otherwise mitigate the commission’s influence on policy and public opinion. As a matter of fact, it was Myanmar military that was determined to kill the final report upon delivery in August 2017: Annan’s recommendations stand in the way of the military’s attempt to complete its “unfinished business.” One has to be absolutely delusional and stupid not to see how this report plays right into the hands of the Myanmar generals. The military strategists simply honey-trapped the young, primitively armed angry Rohingya militants to attack a few military and police outposts as they wanted the pretext to launch the large scale genocidal campaign of terror within a few days of Kofi Annan’s report.

My reading of the turn of events since August 26, 2017 stands in sharp contrast with the mainstreamed but patently false view that ARSA triggered these military operations by Myanmar that led to the displacement of 688,000 Rohingyas, burning of nearly 350 villages. ARSA is no Hamas in terms of its capacity or strength. Not even Israel has inflicted this level of genocidal destruction of its target. Myanmar is worse than Israel.

Lt General Kyaw Swe, the home affairs minister, who was in Dhaka on an official visit mentioned that Myanmar was keen to implement a few Annan Commission recommendations. It is a complete act of deception. When the military failed to derail Kofi Annan commission’s work, it attempted to use Annan as its outermost shield internationally. The ex-major and Myanmar spokesperson Zaw Htay said this openly.

What should be done to ensure the security and basic rights of the Rohingya people?

In the short run, the world needs to monitor the Rohingya’s plight very closely. Four types of large Rohingya populations exist today: 307,500 pre-existing Rohingya refugees and 688,000 new arrivals in Bangladesh; nearly half a million inside Myanmar among whom 120,000 are in IDP camps where they are languishing in inhuman conditions; then there are Rohingyas in vast open prisons in areas that are not yet attacked or destroyed by Myanmar military and its Rakhine local militia and vigilantes. Dhaka needs massive infusion of humanitarian assistance both in cash and in kind so that no public health epidemics break out in these large refugee areas of Cox’s Bazaar and Chittagong. 100,000 Rohingyas who are apprised as the most vulnerable as soon as the monsoon season begins, need urgent assistance with relocation, and material support.

In the long run, the only viable safeguard for Rohingyas against Myanmar’s evidently genocidal national policies is to help establish North Arakan sub-region – which has been predominantly Rohingya since Myanmar’s independence – and historically, as UN-protected self-administered Rohingya home. Of course, Myanmar will resist any attempt to help put Rohingyas back on their own ancestral soil. But no genocides ever end without the intervention of some sort from outside power. The Security Council will never authorize intervention although it is tasked with the principal duty of promoting peace and protecting world’s population. Just remember how Bangladesh was liberated from the nasty genocidal attacks by West Pakistan in 1971. Bangladesh had 12 million Bengali or East Pakistani refugees back then. Now you are a nation with a vibrant economy.

Rohingya people deserve and need a piece of earth they can call home, where they can be Rohingya, where they go to school, access medical services, have proper villages, tend to their farms and look after their families – without having to fear being locked in this cycle of large scale terror and violence, forced repatriation, living in “big cages” inside Myanmar – until the next waves of killing and destruction comes.

Is Oxford University becoming complicit in Suu Kyi's Genocide?

By Maung Zarni | Published by JDS on February 16, 2018

When a reality goes off the chart of what is thinkable, fiction is no match.

That Oxford University’s most iconic graduate alive, Aung San Suu Kyi may find herself at the International Criminal Court for her “complicity of silence in crimes against humanity” and even a genocide, will go down in history as one such extraordinary tale. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights situation in Myanmar Professor Yanghee Lee made this unequivocally clear in her six minutes interview with UK’s Channel 4 News on 14 February.

This is no hyperbole.

In the eyes of many conscientious people, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former icon of freedom, human rights and democracy has lost any of her hard-earned moral authority and the image as the “Queen of Democracy” for her role in what UN officially calls “a textbook example of ethnic cleansing” of nearly 700,000 Rohingyas of Myanmar in the last six months.

The finger pointing at the Oxford-educated Burmese Nobel Peace Laureate comes not from her old nemesis, the Burmese generals, who had routinely vilified her in their state-controlled media for several decades during her 15-years of house arrest. Quite the opposite: her admirers and supporters the likes of Sir Geoffrey Nice - former Deputy Prosecutor of Milosevic in the Yugoslavia Tribunal, the outgoing Chief of UN Human Rights Council Zeid bin Ra’ad Zeid al-Hussein and the Special Rapporteur on human rights situation in Myanmar Professor Yanghee Lee of the Republic of Korea.

In an alarming parallel, both Aung San Suu Kyi and Oxford University show indifference to concerns regarding the subject of Rohingya identity, persecution and history.


A letter of concern

In her internal memo to the UN Secretary General Antonia Gunterres, Pramila Patten, U.N. envoy on sexual violence in conflict reportedly wrote the “meeting with the state counselor was a cordial courtesy call of approximately 45 minutes that was, unfortunately, not substantive in nature.” Besides Suu Kyi expressed the “belief” that those (688,000 Rohingyas) who fled did so due to an affiliation with terrorist groups, and did so to evade law enforcement,” according to The Guardian.

In fact, Suu Kyi’s government issues routinely blanket denials in response to any credible findings about its mass graves of Rohingyas executed in cold-blood, systematic and pervasive use of rape against Rohingya women and girls, or destruction of over 340 Rohingya villages in an area stretching 100 Kilometre.

Over 80 scholars, activists and public intellectuals including the iconic names in the Ivory Tower (such as Gayatri Spivak, Noam Chomsky, Johan Galtung, Gregory Stanton, Barbara Harrel-Bond, and so on) publicly sent a letter of concern to the University’s Vice Chancellor Louise Richardson, regarding Oxford University Press’s choice of expert – Dr Jacques Leider - on the victims of Burmese genocide which Suu Kyi is accused of ‘presiding over’, ‘whitewashing’ and ‘denying’.

A chorus of over 1,500 on-line citizens worldwide, who have signed the on-line petition to Vice Chancellor Richardson, echo the concern of the scholars and public intellectuals, towards the roles both Oxford University and Suu Kyi are playing in the still on-going genocide of Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslims.

One would expect a bit more truthful reply from the Office of Vice Chancellor, which has the ultimate administrative authority over Oxford University Press, when it was informed of the collective concern about the OUP’s commissioning of Dr Jacques Leider, the well-known adviser to Myanmar military who denies Rohingya identity, historical existence and the crime of genocide the group has been subjected to for decades. The Vice Chancellor and her executive team have chosen not to even acknowledge the receipt of the letter of concerns. Additionally, it did not respond to the genuine offer of assistance made in writing by the renowned post-colonial scholar Gayatri Spivak of Columbia University in selecting a scholar who will meet the standards of scholarly integrity regarding Rohingya history and identity. 

As a follow-up to the letter to VC, Professor Spivak wrote, “I did indeed insist that future readers of the Oxford history not read a biased account of the Rohingya. The UN considers the Rohingya situation to be certainly ethnic cleansing and even genocide…. Professor Amartya Sen has called it a slow genocide. It is not necessary to take any political position in a scholarly entry. But the account must be impartial. I strongly recommend that the Press locate an impartial scholar to write the entry. I am in Calcutta, away from my desk. I will, however, be happy to help you in this matter if necessary.”

Just as Suu Kyi and her office have consistently dismissed allegations and findings of Myanmar’s international human rights crimes against the Rohingya as “Fake News” designed to tarnish the image of Myanmar, the University apparently considers the concerns about the role of Oxford University Press in Myanmar’s ongoing campaign of genocidal destruction of Rohingya people as primarily “public relations” issue. The written response from Oxford University Press On-line Editor Louis Gulino to a group of East Oxford residents and the Vicar of Cowley St John’s Parish who also wrote to the Vice Chancellor, urged any future correspondence be directed at the publicity office of the OUP.


'A publishing matter (?)'

OUP’s apparent concern about its public relations is understandable in light of the fact that shady ties between the Gaddafi regime of Libya and the London School of Economics (LSE). The controversial dealings had eventually blown up in the latter’s face, having resulted in the resignation of the LSE Director and the collapse of the Centre for the Study of Global Government, which collaborated with Gaddifi regime in training civil servants for a half-million US$.

As expected, Ella Percival, Communications Manager, emailed this response on 8 February, framed in the language of a-moral and purely technical process: “As this is a publishing matter, the first stage of this process is for Oxford University Press to follow these review procedures and, if necessary, implement a more detailed review. If the article does not meet our strict standards of scholarly integrity, it will, of course, not be published. Please rest assured that this decision is currently being considered. We are very aware that the history of the Rohingya is a complex and contentious area of research and, as always, the goal of the Press is to represent this history with accuracy, balance, and sensitivity.”


Here, OUP has attempted to suggest that without fail they follow a strict refereeing process that ensures fairness and accuracy. This does not appear to have been the case with the commissioning of the article in the first place. The fact that only Rohingya communalism was made the focus of an article suggests that there is at least tacit acceptance of the claim made by the opposing Buddhist community of its own authenticity as an ethnic group. Given the controversy over the history and ethnic “indigeneity” within Rakhine, which OUP apparently believes, it would be necessary to commission and publish an equivalent piece examining Rakhine Buddhist communalism simultaneously with the article on the Rohingya. By failing to do so, the OUP has in effect taken sides by focusing on the Rohingya in this controversy for unclear reasons and has decided not to be a neutral party. Moreover, at no point did OUP consult one of the only historians of Rakhine religious communalism as a referee, Professor Michael Charney of the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London, whose University of Michigan doctoral thesis (1999) focused on the subject of religious communalism in Rakhine up through the colonial period. Since then, Professor Charney has continued to write on the region. So far, this has been one sad string of failures by OUP.

Besides these strings of professional failures by the OUP editors, what the non-responses from the Vice Chancellor and the press office’s spins indicate is this: the leaders and managers of the University show no appreciation of our concerns which rest on both the ethical considerations and the intrinsically intellectual issues.

Intellectual and conceptual flaws

The choice of the Rohingya in the OUP’s Asia History on-line reference series is intellectually problematic in and of itself. For Rohingya group identity is being suggested by the category and the announced title as a group identity born out of a communal conflict in Western Myanmar whereas the other party in this communal conflict, namely Buddhist Rakhine, is not subject to scholarly examination. In his numerous interviews – made available in Burmese translation to the Burmese readership inside Myanmar, and public events including the ones sponsored by the Burmese military, the commissioned expert, Dr Jacques Leider, has repeatedly said Rakhine identity is a “real ethnic identity” whereas Rohingya group identity as an “invented political identity” by the politically motivated Muslims in the 1950’s. He has further asserted that the circulation of latter's group identity has been revived only in the 1990’s, in spite of all available historical and official evidence to the contrary.


Furthermore, in the social sciences, it has been firmly established, since the publication of the late Benedict Anderson’s influential work “Imagined Communities”, nations, national sentiments and national identities are all products of collective imaginations. They are social invention. This in fact is Sociology of Identity 101 in any undergraduate degree programs. It is deeply lamentable that the Editors of the world’s largest, respectable university publishing house have overlooked not only the moral dimensions of its choice of Dr Leider as the commissioned expert on Rohingya, but fails to recognize the inherent intellectual and conceptual flaw in subjecting only the identity of the Rohingya to scholarly scrutiny while leaving out the Buddhist Rakhines, as if the group’s identity is aprior “real ethnic” as Dr Leiders falsely argues.

Morally, OUP’s selection of a French-educated expert on Myanmar with known ties to military, from amongst the myriad of qualified scholars to write an authoritative reference for its Asia History Online Reference Education series is just one of three specific ways in which the University is involved with Myanmar government.

The other two are Oxford University’s institutional ties with Yangon University, which is known to be a platform for propagating justifications for the Burmese genocide, and Oxford based or trained Burmese who openly espouse anti-Rohingya racism in their Burmese-language social media posts such as Facebook, the most widely used medium for the incitement to commit genocide against Rohingya. This is in addition to spreading intentional misinformation disparaging Rohingyas and their claims of extreme repression and persecution.

In response to Aung San Suu Kyi’s appeal or “challenge” made during her visit to Oxford in 2012, during which she was conferred an Honorary Doctorate, the University – then under the vice-chancellorship of John Hood – established an institutional link with Yangon University with the aim of revamping the higher education in a country reeling from 50-years of intellectual isolation and absence of academic freedom. The British Government is said to have footed the bill of 4 million GBP. Who indeed would object to a western university of Oxford’s calibre helping to improve the quality of Burmese university education?

Technically, Oxford University is collaborating with Yangon University, and this is a tie between two institutions of higher learning. On the surface.

But the problem is, in spite of the talks of democratic transition, the repressive character of higher education sector in Burma has not changed: recent news report indicates that Yangon University still does not have any administrative or intellectual autonomy from the Ministry of Education. Recently, the same Ministry expelled over three dozen students for holding a protest demanding an increase in educational budget for universities, as UN Special Rapporteur on human rights situation in Myanmar Professor Yanghee Lee pointed out in her Final Statement on Myanmar.

Even the transition itself has reportedly gone off the rail as Suu Kyi’s own government itself stands accused of resorting to the pattern of old repressive tactics” in the face of allegations of its criminal responsibility in the case of “textbook example of ethnic cleansing” of Rohingya, to borrow the words of UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres.

Most troublingly, Yangon University website openly echoes the government’s blatant denial that the Rohingya did not exist, despite all historical and official evidence to the contrary. And many of its recent graduates join the loud chorus of Burmese voices which deny any wrong-doing by Myanmar, both the government and the country’s above-the-law military.

Any scholar of genocides knows that denial and dismissal of any allegations of international state crimes including crimes against humanity and genocide is a common feature of systematic destruction of peoples and communities, from Nazi Germany to Rwanda, from Indonesia genocide of the Chinese to Bosnia and South Sudan. The fact that Yangon University, its faculty and graduates are engaged in this classic denial of atrocities, should be a serious concern for Oxford University administration.


Undermining standards of excellence

Finally, some of the well-known Burmese researchers who are brought to Oxford University for research and academic residency are known to be spreading the verifiable misinformation or “Fake News” in today’s parlance, such as “Bengali”, (a Burmese racial slur in reference to the Rohingya), burned their own homes. Dr Khin Mar Mar Kyi - Aung San Suu Kyi Gender Scholar - based at Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, was caught sharing, approvingly, the official Myanmar Government propaganda on her Facebook page. Similarly, another Burmese/Rakhine researcher named Aye Thein, who is part of Yangon-Oxford educational arrangement, was airing in Burmese language writing extremely racist and disparaging views about the Rohingyas, the victims of Burmese genocide.

Yesterday, British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson was seen on Britain’s Channel 4 News directly confronting Dr Win Myat Aye, the Minister for Social Welfare and Aung San Suu Kyi’s point man on the humanitarian crisis, during a visit to the affected Rohingya region of Western Myanmar. Win Myat Aye was caught on camera repeating the official lie that “they (688,000 Rohingyas who fled to Bangladesh as the result of Myanmar military’s scorched earth “security clearance operations” since August) torched (their own villages)”. Johnson’s incredulous and instant response was, “why would they do that”? Subsequently, the Foreign Secretary told the media that Myanmar was putting out these “farcical tales” in order to cover up its “industrial scale ethnic cleansing”.

When it comes to standards of truth, politicians, government officials and political leaders are the last the world would turn to. In sharp contrast, Oxford University which is seen globally as a standard bearer in academic knowledge production is expected to uphold high standards of excellence in research, scholarship and publishing of which intellectual integrity, factual accuracy and fairness in interpretation. The choice of Rohingya identity and history to be subject to scholarly scrutiny while giving the group in the horizontal conflict a pass, calls into question the professional judgment of the Asia History Series, besides OUP hand-picking the European scholar who advisers Myanmar military openly in the midst of the latter’s ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya.

On 29 January, the student-run Oxford Union devoted an evening of discussion on the subject of genocides in Rwanda, Cambodia, South Sudan and Myanmar with four scholars and practitioners of international law and activism against genocides. As the Burmese panelist, I thanked the Union and its bright and internationally interested student members in the audience for organizing and attending in large number and specifically called their attention to the complicity of Oxford University in my country’s on-going genocide of the Rohingya people.

Oxford students have indeed shown humanistic concerns and intellectual curiosity about genocides, past and present.

It is high time that the leadership of the University reviews its institutional ties to Myanmar’s higher education sector. Further, the University ought to stop letting itself be used, wittingly or not, by individual scholars and experts whose denialist stance on the Rohingya, their identity, history and sufferings should be ground for withdrawal of commissioned work, professional ties, and support.

By all indications, Aung San Suu Kyi will be unable to salvage her condemned name at the 11th hour of her political career. But the administration of the University of Oxford still have a chance to do the right thing and avoid being recorded in history of genocides as a by-stander at best and complicit at worst, in the Burmese genocide.

Maung Zarni, a fellow with the Genocide Documentation Center of Cambodia, is a former Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Department of International Development. He co-authored, "The Slow Burning Genocide of Rohingyas in Myanmar", the first academic study that looks at the plight of the Rohingya using the genocide framework.

Event: Rohingya: The Silent Genocide?

22 Feb. Pembroke College, Oxford 

#OxfordUniversity Islamic Society is hosting an evening devoted to "#Rohingya: The Silent Genocide?". 

Senior General Min Aung Hlaing openly calls it "an unfinished business". 

Imagine what "a finished business" to them looks like. 

We'll call a spade a spade: Myanmar is committing a genocide.



The Rohingya crisis in Myanmar is one of the biggest humanitarian crisis the world has seen in the 21st century. Close to a million people have been ‘ethnically cleansed’ of their own land in the space of less than a year. To what extent is the Aung San Suu Kyi-led government to be blamed? Has the international community failed to tackle this disaster? Has the west been too soft with their words? What is our role as students of the University of Oxford, the very same institution Aung San Suu Kyi graduated from and is the recipient of an honorary DPhil? Is there a solution to end the human rights abuses that the ‘most persecuted minority’ has been facing for almost half a century? And many more questions that challenge the current regime in Myanmar and the stance that the global community has taken. 

Join us as some of the best academics and activists who have field work experience in Myanmar address these topics. It will be one of the biggest events held this term by any society and arguably one of the biggest in recent history.


Professor Azeem Ibrahim: 
-PhD, Cambridge University
-Research Professor at the Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College.
-Senior Fellow at the Centre for Global Policy in Washington
-International Security Fellow at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
-World Fellow, Yale University
-Rothermere Fellow, University of Oxford
-Board of the International Centre for the Study of Radicalization and Political Violence, Department of War Studies, Kings College London University.
-Ranked as a Top 100 Global Thinker by the European Social Think Tank in 2010.
-Ranked Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum

Professor Maung Zarni:
-Blogger, writer, columnist, poet, and fellow with the Genocide Documentation Center of Cambodia.
- PhD specializing in the politics of education and propaganda under military rule in Burma
(1962-88) University of Wisconsin at Madison.
- He was also schooled at the Universities of Mandalay, California and Washington
-Taught and/or held research and leadership fellowships at National-Louis University in Chicago, Georgetown, Harvard, Oxford, LSE, UCL Institute of Education, Malaya, and Brunei.
-Co-author, ‘The Slow Burning Genocide of Myanmar’s Rohingyas’
-Recipient of the bi-annual "Cultivation of Harmony" award from the world's oldest inter-faith organization, the Parliament of the World's Religions in 2015.

Tun Khin:
-Actual Rohingya born and brought up in Arakan, Myanmar.
-Grandson of the Parliamentary Secretary during the democratic period in Myanmar.
-President of Burmese Rohingya Organisation, UK which has been a leading voice for Rohingya people around the world.
-Actively involved in informing US Congress and State Department, British Parliament, Swedish Parliament, European Union Parliament and Commission, the UN Indigenous Forum in NY and the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
-Recipient of a leadership award from Refuges International Washington DC in April 2015 for his relentless effort working on the Rohingya issue.

Program for Berlin Conference on Myanmar Genocide

The Death of a Nationalist, and the Birth of a Human

The Death of a Nationalist, and the Birth of a Human


You are built on nationalist, racist lies.
You thrive on those lies.
You will be buried under those lies.
My Conscience is greater than the sum total of those lies.
You have no more hold on me.

I have no friends nor family who swallow those lies wholesale.
I keep no company of Racist Liars.
You have no hold over my heart, imagination or intellect.

I ain't your 'son' or Tai-Yin-Thar
I ain't your Citizen.
I ain't your Subject.
I respect no Myanmar Law.

I am free, at last.

A human.

Let there be more humans.

Myanmar's most revered monk Sitagu preaches "Genocidal Buddhism"

Myanmar's "Buddhist Wahabism":

"Those humans who don't know 5 Buddhist Precepts and 3 Jewels" are animals. Killing them by the thousands is no bad karma.

- His Holiness Sitagu

He is patronized by National leaders#AungSanSuuKyi & #1 General Min Aung Hlaing.

​His Holiness Sitagu Examining the Burmese Army front line positions vis-a-vis minority armed resistance groups ​
Senior General Min Aung Hlaing with His Holiness Sitagu

Obama with His Holiness Sitagu on his historic visit to Burma, Nov 2012

Senior General Ming Aung Hlaing with the self-described Buddhist bin laden, Wirathu (Sitagu's top disciple jailed for his involvement in burning a Muslim family alive inside their home in Kyauk Hse in 2004 (?), the dictator Than Shwe's hometown, about 1 hr drive south of Mandalay

Myanmar feudal racists & nationalists, not colonial Britain, are to blame for the country's Hell

We Bama must stop blaming our former alien colonizer, the British. We are no better.

Miseries of Rakhine and Rohingyas can be traced back Bama Colonial Genocide of 1784.

Several years ago I was visiting the 14th century seat of Siamese kingdom, Ayutthaya, about 80 Kilometer north of Bangkok with my mother, a historian by training and a practising Buddhist till her
last breath.

I asked her how she felt about visiting the place, with burnt marks and beheaded Buddha images - all done by Kongbaung invading troops - made up of Dry Zone Bama and other peasants like the Shan, the Karens, etc.who lived en route from Shwe Bo to Siam, forced or incentivised to partake in the complete and total destruction of a neighbour's seat of the kingdom.

Her reply was, "sad".

As a student of history, she knew how genocidal the Bama feudal rulers were, burning down the Mon's center of power at Pegu only a decade earlier in 1750's, having resulted in the first known exodus of war-fleeing refugees into Siam. The total destruction of Pegu was carried out by the founder of the last Burmese feudal dynasty, the village chief Aung Zeya, who like any other ruthless military strong-man crowned himself "King".

After the destruction of this Siamese kingdom, the Konbaung conquistadors took aim at Mrauk-U, an Arakan kingdom of multiethnic peoples of Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, etc.

So, the total misery of the Rakhine, Rohingya and other inhabitants of today can in fact be traced to Konbaung a colonial genocide of 1784, as opposed to the British conquest of Arakan in 1824. troyed the Rakhine kingdom at Mrauk-U in 1784. Maung Wai was the same guy who brought thousands of Rakhine POWs to back to Mingun, a temporary palace site, across the Irrawaddy from Mandalay where they were made to bake red bricks and build this Un-finished Pagoda. He squandered royal treasures for his megalomaniacal temple building while the commoners starved, literally. The rice from royal granaries had to be distributed freely to stave off the kingdom-wise famine.

The Bama's ruthless military conquest of Mrauk-U too resulted in close to 200,000 residents fleeing into the Sultanate of East Bengal, a British protectorate, in 1784-85, and sowed the seed of an extremely potent Rakhine Ethno- Nationalism against the dominant Bama in the Dry Zone.

Though linguistically related, no Rakhine with a nationalist consciousness likes to even speak Burmese, let alone embrace a life of a subjugated people under the ruthless, blood-sucking Bama militarism.

So, the Burmese military came up with a classic Divide and Rule strategy: it pits Muslim residents, particularly demographically 1/3 Rohingyas against the nationalistic Rakhine who make up the rest of
the region's population.

No doubt that the total misery of the Rakhine, Rohingya and other inhabitants tof today can in fact be traced to Konbaung colonial genocide of 1784, as opposed to the British conquest of Arakan in 1824.

The Burmese kings were effective killers, grabbers of land, raiders of slaves and builders of temples with prisoners of wars, but they were no nation-builders in the good sense of the word.

Myanmar Tatmadaw models itself along those ancient, eventually self-destructive and suicidal political culture and mindset.

Aung San Suu Kyi wants her father to be recognized as the Founder of the 4th Bama Empire. The Marxist-inspired anti-imperialist father would be turning in his grave, in complete misery that the daughter and the army he gifted his beloved country have irreversibly turned imperial and Fascist respectively.

Neither Fascist entities or colonial political systems last. Not even those "world-class" empires, let alone a third or fourth rate tin-pot double-dictatorship of the generals and the Nobel.

Myanmar's end is in sight: the question is not if but when it will break up, emphatically in a violent way.