India Converted Kashmir into Concentration Camps By Sajjad Shaukat (JR 195 SS 66)

India Converted Kashmir into Concentration Camps By Sajjad Shaukat (JR195 SS 66)

Massacre of the Jews through various tactics of torture in the concentration camps, erected by Hitler before and during the World War 11 is still shocking and condemnable. It was a big tragedy, popularly known as the Holocaust, conducted by the forces of state terrorism.

According to the Zionist-controlled American leading think-tanks and media, “Genocide of 5 [or six] million Jews was carried out at the extermination camps, using tools of mass murder, such as gas chambers of Germany, Poland, Austria and Alsace”

But, impartial researchers have opined: “All Jews were not killed through gas chambers, but also due to hunger, diseases and depression.”

Renowned historians agree that Hitler was impulsive ruler, guided by ungoverned temper—he was the most ambitious leader who believed in the principle of “world power or downfall.” He had a firm faith in the superiority of German race and inferiority of other races. Anti-Semitism and the Nazi ideology played a major role in Hitler’s thinking. He believed that the path to German greatness was through aggressive military actions. He started a programme of enormous armament by developing German military on modern lines.

After coming to power, Adolf Hitler’s internal policies were authoritarian and totalitarian. The secret police-Gestapo was formed to deal with the slightest indication of opposition. He mixed politics with religious fervor and massacred several Jews in the concentration camps. 

Hitler and the Nazi Party had come to power with the avowed purpose of conquering colonies and foreign lands for the Germans. They must have a living space-‘Lebensraum’ as the Nazis called it for the living surplus German population and find raw materials and markets for German industrial goods.

It was due to Hitler’s unskilled diplomacy that militarization of Germany alarmed France, England and Russia. Thus, they humiliated the Germans, as their country was defeated in the World War II.

Learning no lesson from ‘Hilterite’ Germany, India converted Kashmir into concentration camps. In this respect, Indian extremist Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government ended special status of the Jummu and Kashmir on August 5, this year by abolishing articles 35A and 370 of the Constitution in a malevolent attempt to turn Muslim majority into minority in the Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK).

The upper house of India’s parliament also passed a bill proposing the state of Jammu and Kashmir which includes the Kashmir Valley and the Ladakh area—be split into two federal territories. Jammu and Kashmir will have a state legislature, and Ladakh will be ruled directly by New Delhi.

India which already had 500,000 troops in the Indian Controlled Kashmir sent almost 30000 extra troops, while escalating tensions with Pakistan.

Despite, India’s excessive deployment of troops in the Kashmir region, expulsion of Hindu pilgrims, tourists, closure of educational institutions, arrest of the Kashmiri leaders and imposition of curfew, Kashmiris have accelerated the war of liberation, being waged for their right of self-determination, which was also recgonised by the United Nations resolutions.

In fact, India is implementing brutal scheme through military operation to suppress the Kashmiris’ struggle. Indian forces have already intensified state terrorism, as every day innocent Kashmiris are being martyred. In the recent past, Indian forces again used cluster bombs on the Kashmiris. Many Kashmiris have become permanently blind and paralyzed due to pellet guns shots, including chemical weapons used by the ruthless Indian forces.

In this connection, human rights groups and even Western media have condemned Indian illegal measures and human rights violations which continue unabated.

The Independent wrote on August 13, 2019: “Kashmir’s tight security and communications lockdown remained in place…as reports emerged of daily essentials running low. Restrictions on almost all movement in the disputed Himalayan region were strictly enforced…With internet and phone lines still cut off since the decision on 5 August to strip Kashmir of its special constitutional status and the right to make its own laws, the valley has become the setting for all-out information warfare….soldiers stopping vehicles in the centre of Srinagar, causing a traffic jam just as a military surveillance drone flew over….The network of barbed passageways was unprecedented…entire Srinagar city has been knitted in razor wire to seek our silence and obedience…closure of mosques curtailed the religious freedoms of Kashmiri Muslims…Restrictions and curtailment of this fundamental religious freedom of millions of Kashmiri Muslims constitutes a serious violation of applicable international human rights law, to which India is a party.”

The New York Times wrote on August 10, 2019: “On the streets of Srinagar, Kashmir’s biggest city, security officers tied black bandannas over their faces, grabbed their guns and took positions behind checkpoints. People glanced out the windows of their homes, afraid to step outside. Many were cutting back on meals and getting hungry….Shops were shut. A.T.M.s had run dry…internet, mobile phones, even landlines…remained severed, rendering millions of people incommunicado…life under lockdown in Kashmir and found a population that felt besieged, confused, frightened and furious by the seismic event…Several residents said they had been beaten up by security forces for simply trying to buy necessities like milk. Many Kashmiris see India as an oppressive and foreign ruler. Tens of thousands of troops from the Indian Army, the Central Reserve Police Force (a paramilitary unit) and the Kashmiri State police have been deployed in just about every corner of the valley. In some villages, even remote ones, a soldier was posted outside the gate of each family’s home….The lockdown’s effects are visible everywhere. Schools have been closed. Parks are deserted. Baby food is running out…At the Lala Ded hospital, sick people had traveled more than a day to get here, only to find a skeleton crew. Many doctors couldn’t get to work. Many patients were curled up on the floor…Many Kashmiris fear that Mr. Modi’s sweeping decision, which also wiped away a decades-old provision that gave Kashmiris special land ownership rights, will encourage millions of Hindu migrants from India to move into the valley, fabled for its stunning alpine scenery and fertile soil. Kashmiris fear they will be turned into a minority in their own land.”

On August 12, 2019, Human Rights Watch (HRW) demanded the Indian government to lift the communications blackout and step back in Kashmir. In a statement, the HRW South Asia Director Meenakshi Ganguly said since one week Kashmiris remain mostly under lockdown and their leaders are under arrest.

In a press release on August 13, 2019, Amnesty International condemned a decision by India’s Supreme Court to allow New Delhi to continue a security crackdown and communications blackout in Kashmir. Urging New Delhi to ease restrictions imposed in Kashmir, Amnesty warned that “a complete clampdown on civil liberties is only likely to increase tensions, alienate the people and increase the risk of further human rights violations”.

Notably, various forms of state terrorism have been part of a deliberate campaign by the Indian army and paramilitary forces against the Muslim Kashmiris, particularly since 1989. It has been manifested in brutal tactics like crackdowns, curfews, illegal detentions, massacre, targeted killings, sieges, burning the houses, torture, disappearances, rape, breaking the legs, molestation of Muslim women and killing of persons through fake encounters.

Besides Human Rights Watch, in its report on July 2, 2015, the Amnesty International has highlighted extrajudicial killings of the innocent persons at the hands of Indian security forces in the Indian Held Kashmir. The report said, “Tens of thousands of security forces are deployed in Indian-administered Kashmir…the Armed Forces Special Powers Act allows troops to shoot to kill suspected militants or arrest them without a warrant…not a single member of the armed forces has been tried in a civilian court for violating human rights in Kashmir…this lack of accountability has in turn facilitated other serious abuses…India has martyred one 100,000 people. More than 8,000 disappeared (while) in the custody of army and state police.”

It is of particular attention that in 2008, a rights group reported unmarked graves in 55 villages across the northern regions of the IOK. Then researchers and other groups reported finding thousands of mass graves without markers. In this respect, in August, 2011, Indian Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission officially acknowledged in its report that innocent civilians killed in the two-decade conflict have been buried in unmarked graves.

Foreign sources and human rights organisations have revealed that unnamed graves include those innocent persons, killed by the Indian military and paramilitary troops in the fake encounters, including those who were tortured to death by the RAW. In the recent past, more unmarked graves have been discovered.

In this regard, in its report, China’s leading News Agency Xinhua has unearthed more unnamed graves in Poonch of the Indian Controlled Kashmir. The report quoted the statement of Sofi Aziz Joo, caretaker of a graveyard as saying, “Police and Army used to bring those bodies and direct me to bury them. The bodies were usually bullet-ridden, mutilated, faces disfigured and sometimes without limbs and heads.”

It is noteworthy that in a series of tweets on August 12, this year, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan has likened India’s abrogation of Jammu and Kashmir state’s autonomy to Nazi ideology, and warned the international community that inaction would be similar to appeasing Hitler Munich.

Prime Minister Khan further stated: “The ideology of Hindu Supremacy, like the Nazi Aryan Supremacy, will not stop in Kashmir…the Hindu Supremacists version of Hitler’s Lebensraum would lead to the suppression of Muslims in India and eventually lead to targeting of Pakistan…Attempt is to change demography of Kashmir through ethnic cleansing”.

Addressing the session of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly in Muzaffarabad on August 14, this year, Prime Minister Imran Khan said: “He has assumed responsibility of raising the voice of Kashmir in the world by exposing the true face of RSS ideology dominant in India is dangerous for all…he has tried to fully expose the true face of BJP and its leader Modi before the world in his statements and tweets…ideology of RSS which was inspired from Nazi party of Hitler. RSS followers considered themselves superior to other nations in India. The RSS ideology hates Muslims and Christians for their ruling of India. In their agenda, ethnic cleansing of Muslims is also included…the extremist mindset and ideology of Hindus was responsible for killing of Mahatma Gandhi. This ideology also showed its ugly face in Gujarat carnage of Muslims…the intensity of violence against Muslims in Occupied Kashmir during the last five years is also due to this fanatic ideology”.

The premier also warned that Pakistan will respond with full force, if India launches any aggression against Pakistan, and said, “not only our valiant armed forces, but the whole nation is ready to defend the motherland”.

Taking cognizance of revoking special status of the Jummu and Kashmir by New Delhi, including restrictions on the Kashmiris, Pakistan celebrated its Independence Day on August 14 in showing solidarity with the Kashmiris and observed Indian Independence Day on August 15 as the Black Day in Pakistan.

It is because of joint efforts of Pakistan and China that the United Nations Security Council will hold a session to discuss the situation in Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir and India’s decision to revoke the special status of occupied Jammu and Kashmir on Friday (August 16, 20119).

Undoubtedly, we can conclude that India converted Kashmir into concentration camps.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

The brutality and savagery of Gujarat massacres (Chachi) by Nishrin Jafri Hussain (JR 156 NH 03)

The brutality and savagery of Gujarat massacres (Chachi) by Nishrin Jafri Hussain (JR156NH03)

 On the eve of Indian elections

In 2015, after my third cup of delicious ginger tea at Sanjiv Bhatt’s house, he had convinced me that I should write, that if no one else he will read and yes will ignore the grammar. So here is one such truth. Tragic but it will make you think of the system, the evils of our society and if this is how we want us to be and if so, for what.

Kaun Banega Crorepati:

I didn’t get to watch Kaun Banega Carorepati, also known as KBC that started in 2000 I believe until very late after few seasons had passed. But when I started watching it, at every episode there was only one person on my mind, “Chachi” (Aunty). At every episode I imagined I was entering the KBC stage holding Chachi’s hand, helping her to the tall chair facing Mr. Amitabh Bachchan preparing her so she can tell her story. Story of her love, courage, life and what she lost.

I honestly don’t know her name to-date. I just know her as Chachi, she was Anwar Mamu ki biwi, (Anwar Uncle’s wife). My childhood friend Salma though called her “Mumani” as she was related to her. She was just a neighbor to us, I have always known them to be in that house. Their three-story bungalow was right next to ours in Gulberg Society, simply separated by a small alley and a Neem Tree that is still standing tall and green after 18 years today since 2002.

Her story defies all rules of “you get what you deserve”.

I have always known her to be in that house. It’s not like I could write she married and came to live here. She was already living in that house with Anwar Mamu and her in-laws, a big family. She had a room and kitchen in her possession on the ground floor of the house. She kept it very neat and clean, including the front and back yard. I went to the house now and then to give or bring something on Ammi’s orders.

A lot went through my mind when once in 2017 Raveena Tandon tweeted on how those who wear Saree in India are true Indians. Chachi could have received special consideration had the Hindutva mob that surrounded her house on that day known she had never worn anything but a saree all her life. Never a Punjabi or a nighty that most house wives commonly wore. A true national in one sense. But that didn’t help.

I didn’t know much about her but from Ammi I knew she was the only child, her parents loved her dearly, she was all they had. I had seen her parents now and then. They also lived in Ahemedabad and were very humble people. They didn’t visit her much, maybe once or twice in a year and she didn’t visit them much either. I had heard that they had put in their entire retirement money in completing this house for her. She lived a simple life. Anwar Mamu was a tailor and had lost one leg on the train tracks a long time ago. She was also mother of three kids, two boys and a girl. The reason I was called “Jafri Saheb ki Nargis” (my house name is Nargis, Nishrin is official school name) was because we had two other Nargis in Gulberg Society, her daughter and also Mohammed Kaka’s daughter who was also Nargis, whom we called “Nargis Ben”. Chachi loved Nargis dearly, but Akhtar, her youngest was her star. Her older Son Aslam was a trouble maker, for her and for others in the Society. But Akku, as she and we all called him was her darling. I often played with him. I grew up playing marbles, “gilli danda” (not sure what it is called in English) with the society boys. Sometimes we made a fire and sat around outside throwing paper and twigs in the fire until I was called inside. At a young age Akku had started spending time at his father’s shop and was learning the trade of tailoring. He was soft spoken and hard working. After I left home and when I visited in summers with my little boys, I often sat on the swing outside in the backyard and starred at their backyard. Ammi would fill me in by saying how finally Chachi has found peace in her life. That is because Chachi’s married life was a painful one. But she always looked contained. She kept herself busy with her house work. She did go to a movie or two with my Aunt Suraiya and her sister-in-law Najma once in a blue moon. Otherwise she never went out not even to Dargah’s. I don’t remember her doing any religious rituals such as Niyaz or mujlis. But even in this simplest of life in this corner of the world of the 80’s with no TV or YouTube she had a secret, something or someone she dearly loved besides her son Akhtar. And I was one of the few that knew this secret.

She took pride in taking care of her house and family. Her kitchen had few utensils, all shiny steel vessels and a kerosene stove. Her room had one bed made of iron frame, always covered with a neat bed sheet. Under this bed was a green metal trunk or like we called it “patre ki peti”. This I believe was her only possession and no one was allowed to touch it. Not sure if it had a lock. But for whatever reason she had opened the trunk in front of me several times. I would sit comfortably with my legs folded neatly on the floor spreading my frock and covering my knees with it as she would open the trunk. And their he was, Mr. Amitabh Bachan. Small and large photos stuck on the inside of the trunk, almost every inch of it was covered with his photos. I also had contributed to her collection now and then when I found some pictures in some magazines as I knew she collected them, though in those days we had few filmy magazines. Large photos of Mr. Bachan were kept at the bottom and several of them neatly straitened under her neatly folded sarees. She had to spread a newspaper first on the floor, remove all her Saree’s to get to them. But we always had time. Some very large posters were rolled and kept. Ah the times and situations. I never questioned why she never displayed her love and passion on the empty walls of her room. As if I knew without anyone had said or explained to me that in her situation it was not possible. I just knew that this was a secret. I don’t think I ever told this to Ammi or anyone. She called Mr. Bachan “lambu” out of love, just in front of few chosen people, one of them was me. Can you imagine the times, the situations, the surroundings and the people?

So here I question as to which God Almighty had an issue with her and her life. What sins she had done that she was so dearly punished for.

On March 1st, 2002 when I called, I was told Anwar Mamu was beheaded. Nani was also found burned and dead in her room. Akhtar and his wife were found in pieces in my backyard, they tried to hide in the bathroom in the back of our house but were pulled by the Mob and cut to pieces by the swords. And Chachi? Chachi’s body was not found. This is reality I am writing, this is no fiction, no story. This was in Ahemedabad, Gujarat the model city and state of India. Several days later they found Chachi, alive. She was but some 50 kgs., not sure how she survived the burns. The Mob thought she was dead as she lay with her burned back in the back yard of her house among other dead bodies.

On February 28th, 2019, on 18th death Anniversary of her husband and beloved son Akku, I finally met her at Gulberg Society. She was as slim as she was always, wearing a neat saree. Our eyes met, we didn’t say anything, she smiled and hugged me tight as if we could hear each other, as if she was asking me “how are you, you must miss Abba so much” and as if I was asking “how did you learn to live without Akku”.

She sat next to me holding my hand and slowly we walked towards our houses, still smelling of our loved ones among the ruins. We entered her room from the front verandah. She glanced through the room and said, “There I had my trunk under the bed, you remember” without looking at me. “I do remember" I said, "and I also remember what was in the trunk”, she immediately looked at me, “sab “lambu” ki photo bhi jal gayi” (All Mr. Bachans photo’s burned too).

My countries, my people, my friends, close your eyes and think for a moment:

What have we become?
What have we done?
How did we play God?
Who are we?
And Why?
Again, for what?

Israel: The ‘Bleeding Wound’ of the US, Bringing about its Downfall By Sajjad Shaukat (JR131SS22)

Israel: The ‘Bleeding Wound’ of the US, Bringing about its Downfall By Sajjad Shaukat (JR131SS22)

The former Soviet Union which had subjugated ethnic and religious communities in various provinces and regions through its military and intelligence agency KGB disintegrated in 1991. Even, its nuclear weapons could not save its collapse. One of the major causes of the disintegration of the former Russian Empire was that its greater defence expenditures exceeded to the maximum, resulting in economic crises inside the country. In this regard, about a prolonged war in Afghanistan, the former President Gorbachev had declared it as the ‘bleeding wound’. While learning no lesson, in one way or the other, the US has been acting upon the similar policies which led to the demise of the Soviet Union. In these terms, Israel is the bleeding wound of the US.

History of the post-Napoleonic era in Europe proves that it is not possible to suppress the wars of liberation through military terrorism. In that context, Prince Metternich, emperor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire did what he could by subjugating the alien peoples by employing every possible techniques of state terrorism. According to Indian historian, Mahahin, Matternich had to admit that he was fighting for a useless cause, and the empire disintegrated, resulting in the independence of Italy, Bulgaria and other states whose secret societies had been waging wars of liberation. Similarly, despite the employment of unlimited atrocities by the President Milosevic, collapse of the former Yugoslavia could not be stopped.

Famous political thinker, Morgenthau and others agree that a number of internal factors like population, system of government, geographical location, economic output etc. play a key role in formulating the foreign policy of a country. But, this thesis is quite opposite to the United States where the Zionist Jews shape the internal policies, while moulding American external policy in accordance with their own interests, devoted to Israel.

Visibly or invisibly, many big cartels of the world are owned by the Jews. By controlling the major multinational corporations, arms factories, five star hotels, oil companies, liquor business, food industries, technologies, mining and mineral resources, banks, film industry, print and electronic media in the US in particular and the world in general—having influence on the UNO, financial institutes like World Bank, IMF through America, Jews have direct and indirect hold on the global economy.

In this regard, many intellectuals like Don Allen and others reveal, “The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was founded in New York City by Col. Edward Mandell House (real name: Haus–Jewish), chief adviser to President Woodrow Wilson, in league with stockholders of the Federal Reserve Bank…was part of a conspiracy to gain control of both US political parties to use them as instruments…seventy-three percent of the members of the Council on Foreign Relations are Jews. There are a number of organizations that comprise the Invisible Government that runs America and the world…from behind the scenes. A Jewish group which is in control of national governments and multinational corporations promotes world government through control of the military, media, foundation grants and education including NGOs…and controls and guides the issues of the day, and thus they control most options available. They will manage the money, the land, the food, and the guns of everyone in the world.”

The extent of Jewish grip on the US Administration and American policies could also be judged from the observation of Mike Stathis who, while quoting Senator William J., writes, “The great majority of the Senate of the United States…somewhere around 80 percent…are completely in support of Israel, anything Israel wants.” And “without the all out support by the US in money and weapons and so on the Israelis could not do what they have been doing.”

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a lobbying group that advocates pro-Israel policies to the Congress and Executive Branch of the United States. The New York Times has described it as “the most important organization affecting America’s relationship with Israel,” while other sources calls it “as one of the most powerful lobbying groups in Washington, DC, stating that it “acts as an agent of the Israeli government with a stranglehold on the US Congress with its power and influence.”

According to the Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, “It is long been clear that the pro-Israel, ultra-Zionist network have absolute control over the United States. The idea that our leaders are pursuing America’s vital national interests abroad…is a myth.”

In the words of Senator Fulbright, “Israel’s control over Washington has grown tremendously like a malignant cancer…making the US as a puppet nation of Israel.”

However, after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, American former President Bush (The Senior) in connivance with his Zionist-advisers took the Islamic fundamentalism as a great threat. Since then, sometimes, Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda have continuously been used by the US and some Western countries as a scapegoat to malign Pakistan for ‘de-nuclearisation’ as the latter is the only nuclear country in the Muslim World, and to contain Iran’s nuclear programme which is for peaceful purposes like energy production. Sometimes, bogey of Al-Qaeda was raised to achieve their goals of foreign policy in the Middle East and sometimes to pacify their public, including the opposition. In all cases, the secret purpose behind was to safeguard the interests of the Zionist Jews and Israel.

Just after the 9/11 catastrophe, statements of the George W. Bush, high officials of his administration and Zionist-controlled media deliberately developed chauvinism and extremism among the Americans. There had been an organised campaign against the Muslims in the US and other Western countries. Its main themes were that Islam and the Muslims were the true cause of terrorism. Brushing aside the Israeli atrocities on the Palestinians, American unity was projected with such force as to allow no questioning of the US policy.

Bush warned the world to choose sides by saying, “either you are with us or with terrorists.” It was due to employment of pressure-diplomacy on the weak states—Muslim countries like Pakistan, Indonesia, Libya etc., including almost all the Arab states which joined Bush anti-terrorism war. By manipulating the 9/11 carnage, Bush also got the sympathies of almost all the major Western countries, including NATO states which also joined the fake global war on terror.

Nevertheless, in order to fulfill the hidden agenda of Tel Aviv, the main aims of the Bush administration were to provoke American public against the Muslims and to justify global war on terror—the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq to possess energy resources of Central Asia and Iraq, including proxy wars in other Middle Eastern countries and to get their support for propaganda campaign especially against Pakistan and Iran. Besides other actions of Bush era such as America’s state-sponsored terrorism in the volatile Islamic countries, persecution of Muslims through torture, detentions and arrests, CIA and FBI-operated facilities, radicalising the Western Christians against the Muslims, while providing a golden chance to India and Israel to accelerate the systematic genocide of the Palestinians and Kashmiris—protecting the real architects of the 9/11 tragedy.

While, President Barack Obama who had stated during his first election-campaign that he would rectify the blunders, committed by his predecessor in the name of war on terror, continued the same in their worst form to secure the illegitimate interests of Israel. Obama-led Administration went on with various techniques of ruthless terror and extrajudicial killings of the innocent persons through illegitimate drone attacks—like Iraq, creation of more failed states such as Libya, Yemen and Syria to open the doors for Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State group (Also known as ISIS, ISIL and Daesh).

If the double game of President Bush franchised Al-Qaeda on global level, President Obama’s dual policy franchised both Al-Qaeda and ISIS as part of the anti-Muslim campaign and left no stone unturned in advancing the agenda of the Zionist Jews, Israeli lobbies and the neoconservatives in the pretext of phony Global War on Terror.

When in September 2015, Russian-led coalition of Iran, Iraq, the Syrian army-the National Defense Forces (NDF) and Lebanon-based Hezbollah started breaking the backbone of the ISIS terrorists, Al-Qaeda’s Al-Nusra Front and the rebels in Syria and Iraq. Israeli Mossad which was already having clandestine contact with the ISIS directed this outfit to plan the November 13 (2015) terror attacks in Paris in connivance with the French home-grown militants. Similarly, when Russian-led forces began retaking many cities from the control of these insurgents, on the other side, agents of Mossad who were in collaboration with the CIA sympathizers and the ISIL militants arranged various sorts of terror attacks in Europe and the US.

Through all these false flag terror operations, the US and Israel wanted to obtain their covert aims against Russia and the Muslims. Mossad had also provided the US President Donald Trump with an opportunity to manipulate various terror assaults of Europe and America to win the US presidential election and to reunite America and Europe, as a rift was created between America and its Western allies, especially Europe on a number of issues, including NATO. And President Trump had left no stone unturned in implementing anti-Muslim policies, while speaking openly against the Muslims and Syrian immigrants. Trump had started exaggerating the threat of Islamophobia, while, some incidents were not linked to ISIS, but were the result of self-radicalization of the individuals.

To what extent President Trump wants to obtain Israeli illegitimate goals at the cost of Muslims and the patriot Americans could be judged from the terrorism-related assaults which occurred in the Spanish city of Barcelona on August 17, 2017 and in its town of Cambrils on August 18, 2017. After condemning the terror attacks and offering US assistance to Spain, President Trump suggested “fighting terrorism by executing Muslims with bullets dipped in pig’s blood.”

In case of Asia and particularly South Asia, well-entrenched in Afghanistan and some Gulf states, intelligence agencies such as CIA, Indian RAW, Mossad and MI6 are assisting various terror outfits, including Al-Qaeda and particularly ISIL in order to achieve the covert goals of the Israeli-led America against Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, China, Russia, Iran, Turkey, Somalia, Yemen etc. and even Afghanistan which are being destabilized by various forms of terrorism-related assaults in one way or the other. 

In this connection, a news item was published by all the leading dailies of Pakistan on October 8, 2017 regarding the statement of Afghanistan’s former Afghan President Karzai who, while dismissing criticism of Moscow’s ties with the Taliban and echoing Russian claims of American support to the ISIS terrorists, told Voice of America (VOC) that the United States has links with terrorist ‘Islamic State’, also known as Daesh…Daesh a tool of US…After it [the US] dropped the [mother of all] bomb on Afghanistan, it did not eliminate Daesh…the terrorist group has been supplied weapons by the United States forces…The US Army helicopters and army bases are being used to provide assistance to ISIS terrorists…I do not differentiate at all between Daesh and America…Reports of American assistance to the terrorists are coming from all over the country.” (It also includes Karzai’s revelations to VOC of April 20, 2017 and Newsweek’s report of the same day). 

Particularly, based in Afghanistan, CIA, RAW and Mossad are in collusion, and are using the ISIS, especially in destabilizing Pakistan and Afghanistan as part of the double game of their countries. India and Israel want to prolong the stay of the US-led NATO troops in Afghanistan which has become the center of their covert activities. President Trump is also doing the same in connivance with New Delhi and Tel Aviv. Now, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is special target of these foreign intelligence agencies.

It is notable that Afghanistan-based Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and ISIS which are being backed by RAW, CIA and Mossad have claimed responsibility for several terror assaults inside Pakistan and Afghanistan, including the recent ones.

It is of particular attention that since the fundamentalist party BJP led by the Indian Prime Minister Narindra Modi came to power in India, it has been implementing anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan agenda. Encouraged by the BJP, assaults on Muslims, Christians and on other minorities by the Hindu extremist parties might be cited as instance. India which has strategic partnership with Israel has perennially been manipulating the double game of the US-led West regarding world phenomena of terrorism in connection with Pakistan and Afghanistan.

In wake of Modi’s aggressive diplomacy, India has continued shelling in Pakistani side of Kashmir which remains a nuclear flashpoint between both the neighbouring countries.

Nonetheless, apart from affecting NATO countries and America’s other Western allies, the US cost of Global War on Terror, particularly in Afghanistan has rapidly increased. It also includes other states like Somalia, Yemen, Libya, Nigeria, Philippines etc. where American military and CIA are indirec1tly involved.

In this respect, quoting a report of Washington think tank-the Center for Strategic and International Studies, CNBC and the New York Times pointed out in November 14, 2018: “The U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria…have cost American taxpayers $5.9 trillion since they began in 2001…more than 480,000 people have died from the wars and more than 244,000 civilians have been killed as a result of fighting. Additionally, another 10 million people have been displaced due to violence…In addition to the money spent by the Pentagon, Crawford says the report captures the war-related spending by the Department of State, past and obligated spending for war veterans’ care, interest on the debt incurred to pay for the wars, and…response to terrorism by the Department of Homeland Security…What’s more, longer wars will also increase the number of service members who will ultimately claim veterans benefits and disability payments. The U.S. government spent $4.1 trillion during fiscal year 2018, which ended Sept. 30, according to the Treasury Department. Indeed, the West has largely failed to address the root causes of terrorism that perpetuate seemingly endless waves of fighters who are increasingly turning to armed drones, artificial intelligence and encrypted communications to foil the allies’ conventional military superiority…the report said, the slow pace of reconstruction in Iraqi cities like Ramadi, Falluja and Mosul—once controlled by the Islamic State…has angered residents in those Sunni-majority areas and made them more susceptible to militant entreaties. The report also warns that withdrawing United States forces from Africa and the Middle East—as the Pentagon has started to do—could serve as a boon to these terrorist groups as the Trump administration shifts its national security priorities to confront threats from Russia, China, North Korea and Iran…Americans should understand that terrorism won’t end”, the report concluded, “even though the terrorism threat may ebb and flow.”

The Bloomberg disclosed on September 13 and December 14, 2018: “The U.S. posted the widest November budget deficit on record as spending doubled revenue…The U.S. budget deficit widened to $898 billion in the 11 months through August, exceeding the Congressional Budget Office’s forecast for the first full fiscal year under the Trump presidency…Revenue from corporations fell to $163 billion, down by $71 billion from a year ago. The U.S. fiscal gap has continued…raising concerns the country’s debt load, now at $21.5 trillion, is growing out of control. The 2017 fiscal gap was $666 billion, up from $586 billion a year earlier, according to the Treasury department. The CBO, a non-partisan congressional research body, estimated in April that the budget deficit for the entire fiscal year would increase to $804 billion, before widening to $981 billion in fiscal 2019 and topping $1 trillion in 2020.”

It is mentionable that the war in Afghanistan is America’s longest military intervention which has cost Washington nearly $1 trillion. That is why; America is directly talking to the leaders of the Afghan Taliban in Doha-the capital of Qatar, as demanded by the latter. In this context, reports suggested on January 26, this year that after six days of intensive negotiations, Taliban leaders and US officials meeting in Qatar appear closer to an agreement which could result in the withdrawal of American troops after 18 years of war—it was pre-condition of the Taliban. Zalmay Khalilzad, the US Special Representative for Afghanistan reconciliation and Pakistan have been playing a key role in this connection. 

Now, President Trump has become lenient towards Pakistan. Instead of blaming Islamabad for cross-border terrorism in Afghanistan and emphasizing to ‘do more’ against terrorism, he is asking for its assistance to ‘help more’ to pull out the US-led NATO forces from that war-torn country.

Late last year, Trump ordered a withdrawal of the roughly 2,000 American troops in Syria within 30 days, as American backed rebel groups and ISIS terrorists have been defeated and almost entire Syria have been liberated by the Russian-led coalition.

It is noteworthy that on November 28, 2018, rebuking the President Trump and his pro-Saudi policy, the US Senate through a decisive majority voted to advance a measure to end US military support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen.

President Trump has taken all the above mentioned decisions owing to the rapidly-increase in America’s cost of these conflicts abroad. But, he is too late.

Besides, President Donald Trump’s flawed external policies have created a rift between America and its European partners. Trump has strongly demanded that European NATO members, especially Germany, to pay more for their joint defence. On the other side, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron on January 22, this year said that closer defence ties agreed in a new friendship treaty aim to build a Franco-German “common military culture” and “contribute to the creation of a European army.” The idea has sparked angry reactions from President Trump in wake of EU-US differences over WTO and abolition of Iranian nuclear deal.

Earlier, President Trump annoyed its Western allies by announcing ‘trade wars’, especially to target China. In response, EU and China also took retaliatory decisions. Now, taking the u-turn, he is reconsidering his strategy of trade wars and has shown willingness to negotiate with Beijing.

In fact, it is the result of Israeli-led strategy which Trump has blindly pursued that Washington has lost bargaining leverage even on the small countries like North Korea, Venezuela, Turkey, Iran and Pakistan which have rejected American coercive diplomacy in relation to various issues.

Negative impact of ‘Turmpism’ inside America is also notable, as there is a co-relationship of the US internal and external policies. In this respect, CIA, FBI, Department of Homeland Security which are working separately as “a state within a state” or “shadow Government” or “Deep state means,” are also clandestinely working against one another. They do not respond to the civilian political leadership-the President and the Congressmen who are also fighting a war of nerves against each other. In this context, President Trump ended the longest government shutdown, albeit temporarily. As a result of the funding package, he signed on January 25, 2019 and the government will be open for three weeks. Mr. Trump failed to get$5.7 billion in federal funds for a US-Mexico border wall.

President Trump is also continuously criticizing media. Moreover, Trump’s fanatic policies have given a greater impetus to racialism—white nationalist and neo-Nazi hate groups in wake of intensification of domestic extremism in the US. He is also creating and leading the ‘Christian Taliban’. It seems that the fundamentalist President Donald Trump, will take the US to the “state of nature” when there was a war of “all against all” in the sense of Thomas Hobbes. Such phenomena could also culminate into a civil war in the US.

It is worth-mentioning that the US is homeland of various communities, divided on ethnic, religious and linguistic lines, having affiliations with their own groups. In this connection, in his book, “Who Are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity,” Samuel Huntington opines, America was founded by British settlers who brought with them a distinct culture…the English language, Protestant values, individualism, religious commitment…the waves of immigrants later came to the United States gradually accepted these values and assimilated into America’s Anglo-Protestant culture. More recently, however, our national identity has been eroded by the problems of assimilating massive immigration from Latin America, especially Mexico might lead to the bifurcation of the United States.”

Although President Trump has started America’s disengagement from Global War on Terror-Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan, yet he has founded the downfall of the United States. The cost of these long-term military engagements purely in terms of dollar have accelerated multiple problems of Americans, including casualties and frustration in troops and their families, which is further adding to the internal problems of America, particularly backfiring on the ordinary Americans.

Returning to our earlier discussion, the President Gorbachev had called Afghanistan a ‘bleeding wound’ which culminated into collapse of the former Russia. In the same sense, Global War on Terror which America started to secure the illegitimate interests of Israel is moving it on the Soviet Union’s tract of disintegration. So, we can conclude that in fact, Israel which is the ‘bleeding wound’ of the US is bringing about its downfall.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

Rohingyas of Myanmar a people in limbo (JR100)

Rohingyas of Myanmar a people in limbo (JR100) 

Introduction

The Rohingya people are a  Indo-Aryan ethnic group who reside in Rakhine State.. There were an estimated 1 million Rohingya living in Myanmar before the 2016–17 crises. By December 2017, an estimated 625,000 refugees from Rakhine, Myanmar, had crossed the border into Bangladesh since August 2017.The majority are Muslim while a minority are Hindu. Described by the United Nations in 2013 as one of the most persecuted minorities in the world, the Rohingya population is denied citizenship under the law. According to Human Rights Watch, the 1982 laws "effectively deny to the Rohingya the possibility of acquiring a nationality". Despite being able to trace Rohingya history to the 8th century, Myanmar law does not recognize the ethnic minority as one of the eight races”. They are also restricted from freedom of movement, state education and civil service jobs. The legal conditions faced by the Rohingya in Myanmar have been widely compared to apartheid by many international academics, analysts and political figures, including Nobel laureate Bishop Desmond Tutu, a South African anti-apartheid activist.  

Today, more than one million Rohingya are languishing in squalid camps in southern Bangladesh after suffering ethnic cleansing at the hands of the Myanmar state in late 2017. The international community has largely ignored the suffering of the Rohingya and failed to hold Myanmar accountable. While the 2017 events are the most recent and most gruesome in scope and scale, Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslims have endured decades of political oppression and episodic violence since Myanmar secured its independence from the British in 1948.

Royhingya nomenclature

The modern term Rohingya emerged from colonial and pre-colonial terms Rooinga and Rwangya. The Rohingya refer to themselves as Ruáingga  In Burmese they are known as rui hang gya  while in Bengali they are called Rohingga   The term "Rohingya" may come from Rakhanga or Roshanga, the words for the state of Arakan. The word Rohingya would then mean "inhabitant of Rohang", which was the early Muslim name for Arakan. Andrew Tan argues it comes from the Arabic word Raham (God's blessing) and speculates that early Muslims in Arakan referred to themselves as "God's blessed people".

The usage of the term Rohingya has been historically documented prior to the British Raj. In 1799, Francis Buchanan-Hamilton wrote an article called "A Comparative Vocabulary of Some of the Languages Spoken in the Burma Empire", which was found and republished by Michael Charney in the SOAS Bulletin of Burma Research in 2003. Among the native groups of Arakan, he wrote are the: "Mohammedans, who have long settled in Arakan, and who call themselves Rooinga, or natives of Arakan."  The Classical Journal of 1811 identified "Rooinga" as one of the languages spoken in the "Burmah Empire". In 1815, Johann Severin Vater listed "Ruinga" as an ethnic group with a distinct language in a compendium of languages published in German  In 1936, when Burma was still under British rule, the "Rohingya Jam’iyyat al Ulama" was founded in Arakan

According to Jacques Leider, the Rohingya were referred to as "Chittagonians" during the British colonial period, and it was not controversial to refer to them as "Bengalis" until 1990s.Leider also states that "there is no international consensus" on the use of the term Rohingya, as they are often called "Rohingya Muslims", "Muslim Arakanese" and "Burmese Muslims

The government of Prime Minister U Nu (when Burma was a democracy, from 1948–1962), used the term "Rohingya". When the Mayu Frontier District was created covering Rohingya-majority areas, the term "Rohingya" was recognized by the Burmese government. The term was broadcast on Burmese radio and was used in the speeches of Burmese rulers. A UNHCR report on refugees caused by Operation King Dragon referred to the victims as "Bengali Muslims (called Rohingyas)".Nevertheless, the term Rohingya wasn't widely used until the 1990s.

Today the use of the name "Rohingya" is polarized. The government of Myanmar refuses to use the name. In the 2014 census, the Myanmar government forced the Rohingya to identify themselves as "Bengali". Many Rohingya see the denial of their name similar to denying their basic rights, and the U.N. Special Rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar has agreed. Jacques Leider writes that many Muslims in Rakhine simply prefer to call themselves "Muslim Arakanese" or "Muslims coming from Rakhine" instead of "Rohingya". The United States embassy in Yangon continues to use the name "Rohingya".

The Rohingya population is concentrated in the historical region of Arakan, an old coastal country of Southeast Asia. It is not clear who the original settlers of Arakan were. Burmese nationalist claims that the Rakhine inhabited Arakan since 3000 BCE are not supported by any archaeological evidence. By the 4th century, Arakan became one of the earliest Indianized kingdoms in Southeast Asia. The first Arakanese state flourished in Dhanyawadi. Power then shifted to the city of Waithali.Sanskrit inscriptions in the region indicate that the founders of the first Arakanese states were Indian. Arakan was ruled by the Chandra dynasty.The British historian Daniel George Edward Hall stated that "The Burmese do not seem to have settled in Arakan until possibly as late as the tenth century CE. Hence earlier dynasties are thought to have been Indian, ruling over a population similar to that of Bengal. All the capitals known to history have been in the north near modern Akyab".

Background 

Even the name they use to describe themselves is disputed: In Myanmar, the term Rohingya, which simply means “from Rakhine” (a state in Myanmar), is rejected in preference to the ethno-linguistic appellation “Chittagonian Bengali Muslims” to describe the persons who have lived in Myanmar’s northern state of Rakhine for generations. Neither the government of Myanmar nor most of its citizens recognize the Rohingya as a legitimate ethnic group and instead contend that these hapless people are Bangladeshi. Bangladesh, which became an independent state in 1971, rejects this claim and avers that they are citizens of Myanmar. While Rohingya were citizens of Myanmar at independence, in the subsequent decades the state vitiated these rights and waged campaigns of violence against them, precipitating bouts of temporary displacement to neighboring Bangladesh. With Myanmar and Bangladesh both rejecting the Rohingya as their citizens, they are de facto stateless.

 Prince Shah Shuja received asylumin Arakan in 1660

Early evidence, of Bengali Muslim settlements in Arakan , date back to the time of Min Saw Mon (1430–34) of the Kingdom of Mrauk U. After 24 years of exile in Bengal, he regained control of the Arakanese throne in 1430 with military assistance from the Bengal Sultanate. The Bengalis who came with him formed their own settlements in the region. The Santikan Mosque built in the 1430s features a court which measures 65 ft from north to south and 82 ft from east to west; the shrine is a rectangular structure measuring 33 ft by 47 ft

King Min Saw Mon ceded some territory to the Sultan of Bengal and recognized his sovereignty over the areas. In recognition of his kingdom's vassal status, the Buddhist kings of Arakan received Islamic titles and used the Bengali gold dinar within the kingdom. Min Saw Mon minted his own coins with the Burmese alphabet on one side and the Persian alphabet on the other

Arakan's vassalage to Bengal was brief. After Sultan Jalaluddin Muhammad Shah's death in 1433, Narameikhla's successors invaded Bengal and occupied Ramu in 1437 and Chittagong in 1459. Arakan would hold Chittagong until 1666 even after independence from the Sultans of Bengal; the Arakanese kings continued the custom of maintaining Muslim titles. The Buddhist kings compared themselves to Sultans and fashioned themselves after Mughal rulers. They also continued to employ Muslims in prestigious positions within the royal administration. Some of them worked as Bengali, Persian and Arabic scribes in the Arakanese courts, which, despite remaining Buddhist, adopted Islamic fashions from the neighboring Bengal Sultanate

The population increased in the 17th century, as slaves were brought in by Arakanese raiders and Portuguese settlers following raids into Bengal. Slaves included members of the Mughal nobility. A notable royal slave was Alaol, a renowned poet in the Arakanese court. The slave populations were employed in a variety of workforces, including in the king's army, commerce and agriculture.

In 1660,Prince Shah Shuja, the governor of Mughal Bengal and a claimant of the Peacock Throne, fled to Arakan with his family after being defeated by his brother Emperor Aurangzeb during the Battle of Khajwa. Shuja and his entourage arrived in Arakan on 26 August 1660. He was granted asylum by King Sanda Thudhamma. In December 1660, the Arakanese king confiscated Shuja's gold and jewelry, leading to an insurrection by the royal Mughal refugees. According to varying accounts, Shuja's family was killed by the Arakanese, while Shuja himself may have fled to a kingdom in Manipur. However, members of Shuja's entourage remained in Arakan and were recruited by the royal army, including as archers and court guards. They were king makers in Arakan until the Burmese conquest The Arakanese continued their raids of Mughal Bengal. Dhaka was raided in 1625.

Emperor Aurangzeb gave orders to his governor in Mughal Bengal, Shaista Khan, to end what the Mughals saw as Arakanese-Portuguese piracy. In 1666, Shaista Khan led a 6000 man army and 288 warships to seize Chittagong from the Kingdom of Mrauk U. The Mughal expedition continued up till the Kaladan River. The Mughals placed the northern part of Arakan under its administration and vassalage The Muslim population became concentrated in northern Arakan. In 1960, Burmese cabinet minister Sultan Mahmud cited the Kaladan River as the boundary between Rohingya and Rakhine areas

Burmese conquest

Following the Konbaung Dynasty's conquest of Arakan in 1785, as many as 35,000 people of the Rakhine State fled to the neighbouring Chittagong region of British Bengal in 1799 to escape persecution by the Bamar and to seek protection under the British Raj.The Bamar executed thousands of men and deported a considerable portion of people from Rakhine population to central Burma, leaving Arakan a scarcely populated area by the time the British occupied it

According to an article on the "Burma Empire" published by the British Francis Buchanan-Hamilton in 1799, "the Mohammedans, who have long settled in Arakan", "call themselves Rooinga, or natives of Arakan". However, according to Derek Tokin, Hamilton no longer used the term to refer to the Muslims in Arakan in his later publications.^. Sir Henry Yule saw many Muslims serving as eunuchs in Konbaung while on a diplomatic mission to the Burmese capital

Burmese independence  

The Rohingya community was recognized as an indigenous ethnic nationality of Burma, with members of the group serving as representatives in the Burmese parliament, as well as ministers, parliamentary secretaries, and other high-ranking government positions. But since Burma's military junta took control of the country in 1962, the Rohingya have been systematically deprived of their political rights.   

Rohingya Origin

The history of Rakhine is rich and greatly connected to Arab-Persian cultural world since at least the early 8^th century and with Bengal/Bangladesh region from much earlier times. Muslim Sufis and traders had interactions with the coastal regions of what is today's Bangladesh and Rakhine and all the way to the Indian Ocean rim of wider Southeast Asia. Conversion to Islam took place in areas that fall within the current borders of both Myanmar and Bangladesh. In 1406, the Rakhine king Nara Meikhla was dethroned by an invading Bamar/Burmese force and was driven to Bengal. He was later able to regain his throne with the help of 30,000 soldiers sent by the Bengal Sultan, Jalal al Din. Rakhine kings used to send tribute to Bengal Muslim Sultans for a considerable period of time. However, during the transition period between the decline of independent Muslim rulers of Bengal and the arrival of the Mughals from northern India, Bangladesh's port city Chittagong came under the Rakhine rulers for some time.

Despite these political changes, Rakhine developed a cosmopolitan culture that retained Buddhist as well as Muslim and Hindu pedigree. Rakhine kings issued coins that contained the imprint of the Buddha and the Kalema, the fundamental article of faith in Islam, until early seventeenth century. Medieval forms of Bengali literature were patronized in this cosmopolitan atmosphere where Pali, Arabic and Persian were also in vogue. Poet Alalol from today's Bangladesh, who was kidnapped by Portuguese pirates and sold in Rakhine as a slave, ended up being a court poet in the capital of Rakhine, where he was patronized by many Muslim ministers of Buddhist kings. Alaol in his poems written in mid-seventeenth century introduced Rosango, a variant of the term Rohango (Rohingya), as the capital city of Rakhine.

Meanwhile, the Bamars kept knocking at the borders of Rakhine and finally captured its throne in 1784, leaving the Rakhine people, of both Buddhist and Muslim origin, to face unprecedented persecution in their ancestral land. Most of them fled to Chittagong region across the Naaf river. While some of them returned to Rakhine, some stayed behind who are still known as Rakhine Buddhists, currently numbering more than 100,000. They are now Bangladeshi citizens and Bangladesh has never suggested their ouster because of their ancestry in Myanmar.

It needs mentioning that despite initial persecution of local Rakhine people by the Bamar forces, there were also the gradual realisation of the need of the support and engagement of local people, including the Muslims. One example was that until the British took over Burma in early nineteenth century, the Burmese king had given charge of the Port of Rangoon (Yangon) to a Muslim merchant.

The British period saw a different kind of mobility across today's Bangladesh-Myanmar border, which was more of a planned mobilisation of people from all over India, Bengalis from Chittagong being the majority who were involved in professional, commercial and agricultural activities. By the 1930s however, the Bengalis, as well as other Indian diasporic communities, came into conflict with local inhabitants and with the coming of the Japanese during the World War sealed the fate of the Indians in Burma, most of who had to return to India and Bengal under strenuous conditions. Those few who left behind were clearly distinguished from local Rohingya people

Postcolonial period: From citizen to stateless

The early postcolonial policy of the Burmese government towards the Rohingya was consistent with the pluralistic cultural and religious heritage of Myanmar and inclusive national vision of Aung San, Suu Kyi's illustrious father.

The Muslims of Rakhine including the Rohingyas were no longer living in the rich political and social heritage of pre-colonial times, but there was no question about their place in Burma's mainstream public life. In the two general elections of 1951 and 1956, at least eleven Rohingyas, including women, returned to Burmese Parliament as MPs.

During the 1990 general election that followed the anti-military resistance led by Suu Kyi, Rohingyas were her political allies and won four seats for her National Democratic League for Human Rights. But in the next stage of the unfinished journey to democracy in Myanmar, the paths of Suu Kyi and her erstwhile Rohingya allies diverged tragically. As of 2017, no Rohingyas could vote and there is no Rohingya MPs left in Myanmar.

Rohingya: A Long History of Suffering

The Rohingya have faced military crackdowns in 1978, 1991–1992, 2012, 2015, 2016–2017 and particularly in 2017-2018, when most of the Rohingya population of Myanmar was driven out of the country, into neighboring Bangladesh

While the social and political standing of the Rohingya began to decline when Myanmar gained independence in 1958, their situation became ever-more perilous following the military coup of 1988. A few years later, in 1991, the junta deployed troops to northern Rakhine and confiscated Muslim agricultural land to feed its troops and establish encampments while imposing forced labor and arbitrary taxes. In response to these crippling conditions, nearly a quarter of a million Rohingya fled to Bangladesh where they lived in congested camps. Ultimately, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) oversaw the repatriation of about 200,000 of these refugees, all the while repudiating the conditions under which repatriation took place, including involuntary repatriation.

A restless peace perturbed in Rakhine for nearly a decade, with the notable exceptions of anti-Muslim violence that occurred in 2001. Violence returned in 2010, when Rakhine Buddhists protested a commitment made by the junta-established Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) to grant Rakhine Muslims citizenship as a part of the elections in which they were allowed to vote. Subsequently, in May 2012, several Muslim men raped and killed a Buddhist woman, which catalyzed violence in the northern part of Rakhine state and in the provincial capital of Sittwe. The following month, a mob assaulted and killed a group of ten Muslims in central Myanmar after anonymous actors distributed inflammatory flyers to instigate violence against Muslims. As the ensuing violence spread, including retaliatory Muslim assaults on Buddhists, the government declared a state of emergency and deployed additional troops to enforce it. According to government of Myanmar figures (which may be inaccurate), several hundred persons were injured or killed; additionally, 5,338 homes, mostly belonging to Rohingya, were destroyed and another 75,000—again mostly Rohingya—were displaced.

In October 2012, another wave of anti-Muslim violence resulted in the displacement of 32,000 persons, the majority of whom were Muslim. The government responded by interning some 140,000 Rohingya in overcrowded camps in Rakhine and imposing harsh restrictions on freedom of movement on those not in the camps. The United Nations reports that as of August 31, 2018, there are some 128,245 Rohingya living in 23 camps across Rakhine, most of which are near Sittwe. There is also a ghetto, known as Aung Mingalar, in which 4,000 Muslims are confined in Sittwe itself. Without access to jobs, food, or medicine, Rakhine’s Rohingya are dependent on the international community, which Myanmar grants selective access.

Probes by the UN have found evidence of increasing incitement of hatred and religious intolerance by "ultra-nationalist Buddhists" against Rohingyas while the Myanmar security forces have been conducting "summary executions, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and ill-treatment, and forced labour" against the community.According to the UN, the human rights violations against the Rohingyas are "crimes against humanity".

Before the 2015 Rohingya refugee crisis and the military crackdown in 2016 and 2017, the Rohingya population in Myanmar was around 1.0 to 1.3 million, chiefly in the northern Rakhine townships, which were 80–98% Rohingya. Since 2015, over 900,000 Rohingya refugees have fled to southeastern Bangladesh alone, and more to other surrounding countries, and major Muslim nations. More than 100,000 Rohingyas in Myanmar are confined in camps for internally displaced persons. Shortly before a Rohingya rebel attack that killed 12 security forces, August 25, 2017, the Myanmar military had launched "clearance operations" against the Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine state that left over 3,000 dead, many more injured, tortured or raped, villages burned.

Rohingya claim

The Rohingya maintain they are indigenous to western Myanmar with a heritage of over a millennium and influence from the Arabs, Mughals and Portuguese. The community claims it is descended from people in precolonial Arakanand colonial Arakan; historically, the region was an independent kingdom between Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent. Rohingya legislators were elected to the Parliaments of Myanmar until persecution increased in the late-20th century. Despite accepting the term Rohingya in the past,the current official position of the Myanmar government is that Rohingyas are not a national "indigenous race", but are illegal immigrants from neighbouring Bangladesh. Myanmar's government has stopped recognizing the term "Rohingya" and prefers to refer to the community as "Bengalis". Rohingya campaign groups, notably the Arakan Rohingya National Organization, demand the right to "self-government within Myanmar".

 History of Non-Violence

In spite of the horrific brutalities the Rohingyas have endured, they have not articulated an Islamist or separatist demand. Their demand is simply to return to Myanmar with citizenship and, problematically, with government recognition as a distinct ethnic group. The Rohingya have not given rise to many violent non-state actors claiming to represent them. One of the few violent groups that have emerged in recent years is the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA). While many in the “Islamist terrorism” industry have been quick to paint ARSA with the jihadi brush  ARSA has assiduously rejected Islamist appeals. The longer the Rohingya remain cramped in inadequately-appointed camps in Bangladesh or countenance ongoing ethnic cleansing in Myanmar, the more probable it becomes that either the nature of ARSA will bend towards Islamism and/or Islamist militant groups will conduct violence on their behalf.

Ostensibly inspired by Islamist movements elsewhere in the world, the Rohingya Patriotic Front (RPF) formed in 1974, but over time split into several factions. Perhaps the most important and well-known successor to the RPF was the Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO), which formed in 1982. It also split in 1986 and gave rise to the Arakan Rohingya Islamic Front (ARIF). The RSO and the ARIF later formed a loose alliance in 1998 known as the Arakan Rohingya National Organization.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, the RSO had no presence in Myanmar but had bases in Bangladesh along the border. It never enjoyed support within Myanmar, and by the early 2000s, it had lost its remaining operational capabilities.

A new actor has emerged in recent years: the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA). ARSA is led by Atta Ullah, a Rohingya Muslim. The name of the group he initially founded was “Harakah al-Yaqin” (literally “Movement of Faith”), which perpetrated several high-profile attacks against Myanmar’s Border Guard Police (BGP) headquarters and two other bases on October 9, 2016. In response, the state launched a brutal crackdown including extensive “clearance operations” in an effort to recapture the myriad small arms and thousands of rounds of ammunition stolen by the outfit. The organization subsequently rebranded as ARSA.

While ARSA did not have any ostensible religious motivations, it did legitimize its attacks on Burmese security forces using Islam. It also encouraged senior Rohingya clerics and numerous foreign clerics to issue fatwas asserting that its campaign against Myanmar’s security forces is legal given their ongoing persecution of Muslims in Rakhine state.

ARSA launched several high-profile insurgent attacks. On October 9 and November 12, 2016, it conducted several coordinated attacks on BGP bases in Rakhine. Amnesty International believes the group, brandishing swords and guns, is culpable for one and possibly two massacres of some 99 Hindu women, men, and children, as well as other abductions and murders of Hindu villagers in August 2017. In August 2017, it conducted its most complex attack, which entailed attacking some 30 police posts and an army base in Rakhine; at least 59 insurgents died, along with 12 members of the security forces. In response to this outrage, the Myanmar military mobilized to conduct mass atrocities that the United Nations has declared to be tantamount to genocide. The most recent attack occurred on January 5, 2018, when the group targeted a vehicle with a remote-control mine and then staged an ambush; six soldiers and one civilian driver were injured. It has not conducted any operations since.

Myanmar contends, with very little evidence, that ARSA is an Islamist militant group which aggregates the interest of Myanmar’s Muslim mosaic to undermine the Buddhist nature of the state. The international press has also been quick, with just as little evidence, to assert that the Rohingya are next the wave of jihadists. On these grounds, Myanmar has won the support of China, Russia, and India, which have their own concerns about their domestic Muslim populations and how best to contend with the threats they pose—both real and imagined.

Those who argue that ARSA is a jihadist outfit focus on the fact that Attah Ullah was born in Pakistan and raised in Saudi Arabia. They cite unnamed and unaccountable “intelligence sources” to assert that he is close to LeT, and attempt to connect him with Abdus Qadoos Burmi, another Pakistani of Rohingya descent who is based in Karachi, has ties to LeT, and has appeared in videos arguing for jihad in Myanmar. None of these analysts alleging that ARSA is Islamist produce evidence beyond anonymous “intelligence sources,” many of whom are Indian and have their own vested interests in this popularizing this narrative to burnish their claims that LeT is not simply an Indian domestic problem.

Despite these allegations, ARSA has consistently asserted that it is not seeking a separate state or the imposition of Sharia law. In September 2017,ARSA said it wanted to “make it clear” that it had no “links to al-Qaeda, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, Lashkar-e-Taiba or any transnational terrorist group.” Indeed, ARSA has nothing to gain and everything to lose by associating with any Islamist movement.

Problematically for ARSA’s messaging, though, its flag depicts all of Rakhine state. This has made Buddhists worried that ARSA’s agenda is not simply securing the political conditions for Rohingya to safely return, but a larger agenda to assert dominance over the Buddhist-majority Rakhine state.

Rohingya political participation in Burma

In the prelude to independence, two Arakanese Indians were elected to the Constituent Assembly of Burma in 1947, M. A. Gaffar and Sultan Ahmed. After Burma became independent in 1948, M. A. Gaffar presented a memorandum of appeal to the Government of the Union of Burma calling for the recognition of the term "Rohingya", based on local Indian names of Arakan (Rohan and Rohang), as the official ethnicity of Arakanese Indians. Sultan Ahmed, who served as Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Minorities, was a member of the Justice Sir Ba U Commission charged with exploring whether Arakan Division should be granted statehood. During the Burmese general election, 1951, five Rohingyas were elected to the Parliament of Burma, including one of the country's first two female MPs, Zura Begum. Six MPs were elected during the Burmese general election, 1956 and subsequent by-elections. Sultan Mahmud, a former politician in British India, became Minister of Health in the cabinet of Prime Minister of Burma U Nu. In 1960, Mahmud suggested that either Rohingya-majority northern Arakan remain under the central government or be made a separate province. However, during the Burmese general election, 1960, Prime Minister U Nu's pledges included making all of Arakan into one province. The 1962 Burmese coup d'état ended the country's Westminster-style political system. The 1982 Burmese citizenship law stripped most of the Rohingyas of their stake in citizenship.

Rohingya community leaders were supportive of the 8888 uprising for democracy. During the Burmese general election, 1990, the Rohingya-led National Democratic Party for Human Rights won four seats in the Burmese parliament. The four Rohingya MPs included Shamsul Anwarul Huq, Chit Lwin Ebrahim, Fazal Ahmed and Nur Ahmed. The election was won by the National League for Democracy led by Aung San Suu Kyi, who was placed under house arrest and not permitted to become prime minister. The Burmese military junta banned the National Democratic Party for Human Rights in 1992. Its leaders were arrested, jailed and tortured.

Rohingya politicians have been jailed to disbar them from contesting elections. In 2005, Shamsul Anwarul Huq was charged under Section 18 of the controversial 1982 Burmese citizenship law and sentenced to 47 years in prison. In 2015, a ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party MP Shwe Maung was disbarred from the Burmese general election, 2015, on grounds that his parents were not Burmese citizens under the 1982 citizenship law.  As of 2017, Burma does not have a single Rohingya MP and the Rohingya population have no voting rights.

Pakistan and Rohingyas

The Lahore Resolution and the Pakistan demand embodied the provinces of British India. A short time before Major General Aung San, the father of Aung San Suu Kyi, was tragically assassinated in July 1947; he had met Jinnah in Delhi. Jinnah had assured him that whatever the solution to British India’s communal problem, Pakistan would not stake claim to any territory in Burma. The British colony of Burma had been a separate entity from British India since 1937 and its separate status had been article of faith for the British rulers as well as Indian politicians of every party including the Congress. When certain Muslim leaders approached him to ‘liberate’ Rakhine region from Burmese rule, he refused, advising them instead to live as loyal citizens of Burma.

Bangladesh Response

Responsibility for the fleeing Rohingya has fallen on the government of Bangladesh, which believes it has already spread its resources thin from pushing the country’s still-developing economy onto the world stage. One in four Bangladeshis lives in poverty, but the rate has been dropping for decades. With the Asian Development Bank projecting GDP growth of around 7% for the next year, Bangladesh’s leaders are wary of any situation that could hinder their nation’s economic development. While aid continues to pour in from aid groups, outside governments, and international institutions, the strain of hosting close to a million refugees is palpable.

In October 2016 an earlier wave of violence against the Rohingya in Rakhine state caused tens of thousands to flee into Bangladesh, and most of these “initial” victims have been formally recognized as refugees by the government of Bangladesh. However, the Rohingya who arrived after August 2017 are officially classified as “Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals,” a designation that denies them many of the rights that refugees would enjoy. Bangladesh has not acceded to the 1951 Convention on Refugees or its 1967 Protocol. Officials have been slow to address the problem of formal status, partially out of a real concern over constrained resources. Bangladesh is a country with 160 million people in an area the size of the US state of Iowa but with underdeveloped infrastructure and social services. The government fears that the massive influx of people has the potential to disrupt the livelihoods of many Bangladeshi citizens.

In June 2018, UNHCR and the Bangladeshi government started a joint effort to verify the identities of the Rohingya refugees by using biometric data and issuing identification cards as a precursor step to eventual relocation or repatriation. The process was initially expected to take six months but has been effectively halted after a boycott among the refugees, who object that the cards label them as “Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals” rather than Rohingya. There are also concerns among refugees that the collected data may be shared with the government of Myanmar, putting individuals further at risk.

The Rohingya are largely cut off from Bangladeshi society. Already confined to the camps, refugees are also denied access to the civil legal system, schools, and formal work. International pressure to address the lack of refugee status by the Bangladeshi government has stalled, although the recent allocation of World Bank grant-based aid to Bangladesh could accelerate the process. Fears also persist that if the Bangladeshi government works to integrate the Rohingya into society, Myanmar could further claim that the Rohingya first emigrated from Bangladesh and cannot claim the Rakhine State as their home. In the meantime, the displaced Rohingya are trapped between two options: face the harsh conditions of the camps in Cox’s Bazar or return to their homes in Myanmar with no citizenship or protection.

Bowing to international pressure, the Bangladeshi government has recognized the need to delay repatriation due to ongoing concerns for the safety and status of the Rohingya and has begun to invest in more forward-thinking solutions. A new civilian authority is overseeing the large aid effort, and the military is tasked with maintaining law and order in the camps. Although the task is massive, Bangladesh’s experience managing responses to numerous natural disasters in the past has helped to develop best practices in the fields of risk reduction, training, communications, and community preparedness.

Authorities are sensitive to criticism regarding their handling of the situation, in part because Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has wielded de facto one-party rule after the widespread opposition boycott of the last election in 2014. The next national election is in December 2018, and Khaleda Zia, the leader of the opposition BNP party, remains in jail on contested corruption charges. On the ground in Cox’s Bazar and in the refugee camps, tensions have been raising between the military, researchers, and journalists as more reports emerge critical of the humanitarian situation. I was warned not to mention that my article would include analysis on how the camps have been managed.

 Can the past forecast the future

The past outcomes of Myanmar state violence, in which, the Rohingya suffer silently and without violent mobilization, may not be the best predictor of the future for several reasons. First, this current crisis confronting the Rohingya is thoroughly unprecedented in scale, scope, and the rapidity with which it has transpired. There is a deep well of grievances from which ARSA or any number of Islamist groups can draw.

Second, Bangladesh’s Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, has sought to mitigate criticism that she is anti-Islam given her relentless campaign against the Jamaat Islami Bangladeshi, an Islamist political party that has traditionally aligned with her political nemesis, the Bangladesh National Party, and is accused of collaborating with Pakistan in perpetrating war crimes during the war for independence in 1971. To burnish her Islamist credentials, she has allied with the radical (and sometimes violent) Hifazat-e-Islam (HI), which nearly toppled her government several years ago.

  Hasina has allowed HI to open thousands of quami madaris (religious seminaries that do not teach Bangladesh’s school curriculum) in the camps in Cox’s Bazar and young men can be seen wearing the distinctive skull cap that identifies them as madrassah students. Quami madaris have long been associated with a “rejection of modernity as a whole, including modern education, and their employment of vigorous indoctrination techniques rather than methodical pedagogy,” as well as ties to terrorist groups in Bangladesh.

At the same time, Hasina has eschewed any form of education that would permit the Rohingya to integrate into Bangladesh’s formal economy. Per force, they seek to earn cash through various illicit means available.

Thirdly, and finally, Hasina’s refusal to disperse the refugees throughout the country will continue to tax the host community, who endure the negative externalities of the camps in their backyards, including the imperious behavior of aid workers in the camps. There is little short-term benefit to dispersing the Rohingya refugees. Most Rohingya have expressed little interest in migrating onward and there are few countries who want to receive more of them.

Conclusions

There is no instance in the world where after decades of experience of citizenship and of exercising the rights to electing their representative to parliament an entire population becomes stateless without security to life, property and honor, except of course in Nazi Germany and currently in the Eastern State (Assam) of India where Muslims are in the process of being deprived of citizenship.. It's an irony that Suu Kyi's ascendancy to Myanmar statecraft coincides with the collateral destruction of her erstwhile political allies.

For the foreseeable future, the Rohingya are most likely to be confined to the camps in Bangladesh, no matter how crowded or dangerous. The unprecedented scale of the crisis, domestic political concerns in Bangladesh, and growing attention from jihadi groups make the Rohingya ripe for radicalization, even though groups like ARSA have resisted the violent Islamist ideology associated with al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. Even if ARSA does not emerge as the next wave of jihad as some fear, it is entirely possible that other violent groups will conduct attacks on their behalf in Myanmar or elsewhere. Should this happen, the plight of the Rohingya will become even more dire as what little international support they have at present will quickly dissipate.

Given that the international community is unlikely to muster any pressure on Myanmar, the least international actors can do is continue to help Bangladesh support this beleaguered community and monitor the situation for any developing security concerns while longer term solutions are being pursued

Update: Jan., 6, 2019: Thirteen policemen were killed and nine injured in early morning attacks Friday on police outposts in Myanmar’s Rakhine state by the insurgent Arakan Army, state media reported. The Arakan Army is a rebel group seeking autonomy for Rakhine state from Myanmar’s central government. It has no links with the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army, a Muslim insurgent group whose similar attacks in 2017 sparked a bloody government counterinsurgency campaign against the area’s Muslim Rohingya minority, driving more than 700,000 to flee to neighboring Bangladesh. While the Muslim ARSA group has become virtually inactive, the Arakan Army, which is aligned with the state’s Buddhist population, has taken advantage of the area’s instability to increase its military activities after training its guerrillas in regions controlled by other insurgent groups, including the Kachin in northern Myanmar. There has been an upsurge in sporadic fighting between the Arakan Army and government forces since last month.

Rohingya repatriation: May 21 2019- There are over a million Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, including the latest batch of 800,000 that came after August 25, 2017 and the 250,000 that arrived since the first exodus of mid-1990s. As Myanmar nationals, the Rohingya Muslims have historically faced ethnic and religious persecutions, culminating in 2017 in a fierce, protracted genocidal campaign by the Myanmar army against its own people. The military launched a violent crackdown leading to arbitrary killings of Rohingyas, including children and the elderly, gang rapes of women, inhuman torture, and razing of village after village that forced all those people to seek shelter in Bangladesh, unleashing a humanitarian crisis unprecedented in recent history.

In the last two years, there have been many twists and turns concerning the repatriation of the Rohingya refugees to their homeland. For instance, first, the agreement signed in November 2017 for repatriation did not work due to the unwillingness of the Myanmar government to recognise the rights and citizenship of the Rohingya Muslims. Second, Myanmar imposed an unfair screening and verification process to eliminate the so-called illegal Bengali Rohingyas from the list of returnees. Third, in November 2018, a much-publicised repatriation bid for some 2,000 families was stalled after the refugees refused to return for fear of fresh persecutions and confinement in the newly-built camps across the border in Rakhine State. The repatriation bid was later abandoned and rescheduled for 2019. Fourth, the planned relocation of 100,000 Rohingyas to Bhasan Char appears to have met with scepticism as there are no voluntary takers among the refugees for such a remote home on an island char. Finally, according to an UN official, the repatriation plan is now at a “total standstill.”

With no plausible solution to the refugee crisis in sight, there are growing concerns in Dhaka and among the host communities in Cox’s Bazar, who have been severely impacted by the presence of such a large number of outsiders in their neighbourhoods. There is an equally increasing disquiet among government officials at different levels about the future of the refugee situation. The challenge is to find the right balance between the official rhetoric calling for a speedy return of the Rohingyas and any long-term plans for them in Cox’s Bazar camps, supported largely by external aid and assistance. The ongoing initiatives for more durable houses, improved roads, solar street lamps, training and employment for women, markets/shops within the camps, and finally provisions for schools for the kids are all indications of a much longer—or even permanent—stay. Given the continued military atrocities against the Rohingyas inside Myanmar, the refugees in Cox’s Bazar are not going back to Myanmar any time soon. Aid workers, diplomats and humanitarian agencies working on long-term plans for improving camp conditions would not, however, publicly state this for fear of contradicting the official position.

At this point, despite constant diplomatic efforts by the government, there seems to be no hope for an immediate repatriation. Indeed, the Myanmar government seems least interested in the resolution of the crisis. The “clearance operation” is already done; the Myanmar military is sticking to their lies and deceptions, unwilling to give in to any demands of the international community. Even the strategy to send back the refugees to so-called designated “safe zones” inside Myanmar is not getting any ground; but if it does happen, which is unlikely, it will be tantamount to sending them to concentration camps and robbing them of their future rights and citizenships—which are their primary demands. There cannot be any safe zones in Myanmar unless the perpetrators of the Rohingya crisis, including the military generals, who committed crimes against humanity and genocide, are brought to justice.

The current scenario does not provide any sense of hope or relief for any returnees in Myanmar or those stranded in camps in Bangladesh. The refugees are not allowed to work (although many sneak out to work); they can’t leave the camp, open a bank account, and have a mobile phone (due to security reasons, although many have bought phones from local Bengalis who can have multiple phones); and children can’t attend any Bengali school, which may lead, it is believed, to social and cultural integration. The present dense living conditions, poor quality of water and inadequate vaccination have left Rohingya refugees prone to many contagious diseases. As a result, both the refugees and the host communities in Cox’s Bazar are reportedly vulnerable to serious health risks.

Meanwhile, the host communities are also becoming apprehensive of the long-term presence of the refugees and thus slowly turning hostile towards them. The concern is equally evident in Dhaka. At a recent meeting, leading economists and policy analysts have rejected the idea of providing the refugees with access to the local labour market; instead, they recommended their quick repatriation to ease pressures on Bangladesh because their presence has already posed serious threats to the local environment and population. Thus, any plan for a long-term stay or opening the door for resettlement and integration would lead to conflicts with local communities and raise a range of security issues for Bangladesh. A Rohingya diaspora in Bangladesh also means a second-class status of the Rohingyas and extinction of their cultures. Many refugees don’t want this to happen. They want to return to their homes and re-establish their life on their ancestral lands with dignity and full rights as Myanmar nationals.

The Rohingya crisis has not run its course yet. Bangladesh government should continue to pursue voluntary, safe, and dignified repatriation of the Rohingyas to Myanmar. Since the UN finds the situation to be at a “total standstill”, Bangladesh should look elsewhere and closely work with India and China for an acceptable resolution. India has not been friendly to the Rohingyas and never supported Bangladesh in any international forum to solve the protracted Rohingya crisis. Myanmar seems more important to India than Bangladesh due to India’s economic and geopolitical interests. China has a strong grip on Myanmar at various levels, including the government and the military establishments. Bangladesh must seriously engage both China and India to find a resolution for a dignified return of the refugees. Until this happens, the crisis will continue and bring miseries to the refugee population as well as the host communities.

US sanctions: July, 17, 2019: The US has announced sanctions on Myanmar's military Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing and three other military leaders due to their role in the "ethnic cleansing" of the Rohingya minority. The State Department said on Tuesday it took action after finding credible evidence they were involved in the violence two years ago that led about 740,000  Rohingya to flee across the border to Bangladesh. "With this announcement, the United States is the first government to publicly take action with respect to the most senior leadership of the Burmese military," Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement.

"We remain concerned that the Burmese government has taken no actions to hold accountable those responsible for human rights violations and abuses, and there are continued reports of the Burmese military committing human rights violations and abuses throughout the country," he added. Also sanctioned were Deputy Commander-in-Chief Soe Win, Brigadier General Than Oo and Brigadier General Aung Aung, as well as the families of all four officers.

Buddhist-majority Myanmar refuses to grant the mostly Muslim Rohingya citizenship or basic rights and refers to them as "Bengalis", inferring that the Rohingya are undocumented immigrants from Bangladesh.  United Nations investigators say the violence warrants the prosecution of top generals for "genocide" and the International Criminal Court has started a preliminary probe.

"This is good news if this is the first measure the US will take in addressing genocide in Myanmar against the Rohingya people. It's bad news if this is all Secretary Pompeo and the US administration are planning to do. We are hopeful they will do more," Smith told Al Jazeera from Washington, DC. “The impact [of the sanctions] can be serious. This will flag the responsibility of these individuals for international prosecutors, for example, the International Criminal Court, and it will give pause to business leaders going to Myanmar in doing business with military-owned enterprises