Myannmar
:: Is it genocide?
Analysis by Sam Kiley, Foreign Affairs Editor
The Rohingya situation "seems a textbook example of ethnic cleansing", according to the United Nations' human rights chief.
But it's not yet officially genocide. One can only wonder why not given the definition of the crime in Article II of the Genocide Convention.
:: About Myanmar
Myanmar, also known as Burma, was long considered a pariah state while under the oppressive rule of a military junta before it was dissolved.
The UN reported systematic human rights violations during the dictatorship of the former British colony following a coup in 1962.
The installation of a nominally civilian government in 2011 and the freeing of then-opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest had improved the country's human rights record.
But there has been continuing criticism of its treatment of ethnic minorities.
Amnesty International said the Rohingya have faced increased violence, discrimination and religious intolerance.
:: Aung San Suu Kyi
She was described as "one of the most extraordinary examples of civil courage in Asia in recent decades" when she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991.
But Myanmar's de facto leader has faced international criticism for failing to directly condemn violence by the country's security forces.
Aung San Suu Kyi is a Burmese politician, diplomat, author, and Nobel Peace Prize laureate. She is the leader of the National League for Democracy and the first and incumbent State Counsellor, a position akin to a prime minister. She is also the first woman to serve as Minister for Foreign Affairs, for the President's Office, for Electric Power and Energy, and for Education.
:: Who's helping?
The UK government has pledged £47m since the end of August to help provide emergency supplies for those fleeing violence in Myanmar.
Around £17m was also donated by the British public to the Disasters Emergency Committee appeal
Comments (4)
Elaine Primary School 01 Oct 2018
I believe that Aung San Suu Kyi is a vile role-model towards her country. As she manipulates half of the population of her country,making them believe that torturing people - just because they are a different religion to others - is ok. This is disgraceful and incorrect, if she was part of the Rohingya tribe and she was getting tortured I guarantee that she would disagree with this. Her opinions would 100% change.
I also believe that the Rohingya tribe should be able to start a rebellion (fight against these foul people). I understand that violence isn't the best policy but if you had a working notion you wouldn't want to get tortured any longer.
What do you think?
Boutcher C of E Primary School 04 Oct 2018 in reply to openminded_skill's comment
I don't think the Rohingya trise shouldn't fight back because everyone has their own reason to fight back so the army had a reason to send them away
Elaine Primary School 08 Oct 2018 in reply to believable_introduction's comment
I disagree because if you were getting tortured than you obviously wouldn't like and would want them to stop. Unfortunately, fighting back against them is the only way to stop.
Boutcher C of E Primary School 09 Oct 2018 in reply to openminded_skill's comment
That is true.
You must be logged in to post a comment