April 9, 2013
Asia Times
Dr Maung Zarni
Burma/Myanmar's radical "969 movement" has been central in the recent
brutal pogroms against minority Muslims that have left at least 40 dead
and 12,000 displaced. The Buddhist monk-led group, however, cannot be
understood outside of the interface between President Thein Sein's
government and the country's racist society at large.
Nor can it be explained without examining the respective roles of a) the
State, which in effect offers the country's neo-Nazi Buddhists
impunity, b) Thein Sein's inaction, even amid indications of ethnic
cleansing against minority Muslims, and c) the Aung San Suu Kyi-led
opposition's moral bankruptcy throughout the crisis. The orgy of
violence has raised several important questions about the country's
direction and hopes for reform.
How popular and widespread is the 969 movement and how likely is it to spread throughout the country?
As a new nationalist movement with a clear message of ''racial and
religious purity'', a false sense of Buddhist victimhood, and cultural
and economic nationalism - not dissimilar to Germany's Nazism in the
1930s - 969 is gaining popularity for three main reasons.
First, some of the militant Buddhist preachers from nationally
well-connected Buddhist teaching colleges (such as 969 leader Wirathu)
effectively scapegoat the country's Muslims for the general economic
hardships and cultural decay in society, portraying the ethnic Burmese
as victims at the hands of organized Muslim commercial leeches and
parasites. Second, 969 preys on the historical and popular anti-Muslim
racism among the majority Buddhists. Last but not least, virtually all
state institutions at all levels - including the police, intelligence
agencies, the army, local civil administration and even fire departments
- under Thein Sein's management have offered this Buddhist neo-Nazi
movement both impunity and passive cooperation.
What is the Naypyidaw government doing to crack down on the radical movement?
Thein Sein's official report to parliament on the anti-Muslim violence
against ethnic Rohingyas last year in western Burma/Myanmar's Rakhine
State blamed political parties and Buddhist monks for spreading ''ethnic
hatred''. Yet his administration has not taken a single action against
anyone who openly incited anti-Muslim hatred or ethnic hatred towards
the Rohingyas. Nor has his government detained or even deterred a single
Buddhist preacher of hate for acts of spreading anti-Muslim hatred in
society and inciting blatant calls for phase-by-phase elimination of
Muslims and their influence in society.
"Political parties, some monks and some individuals are increasing the
ethnic hatred. They even approach and lobby both the domestic and
overseas [Arakan] community," Thein Sein's report, submitted to
parliament last August, said. There is thus an unbridgeable gap between
Thein Sein's messages of coexistence and tolerance, to which the Western
mainstream media has given wide coverage, and his government's
inaction, which the same media has failed to report beyond the
observation that local police have stood by idly when organized mob
violence unfolded before them.
All over Burma/Myanmar one can easily find numerous publications, DVDs,
CDs and other anti-Muslim propaganda materials. It is not illegal to
spread anti-Muslim misinformation and hateful views in the country's
more open environment. Instead, the government sued the Voice Weekly
newspaper for printing a single article about corruption at the ministry
of mines.
But it has left untouched various publications that have printed rumors,
slander and misinformation about the country's Muslims. Thein Sein's
government is thus evidently more concerned about being correctly
described as highly corrupt than stopping the sustained and open calls
in various media to turn the country into a ''graveyard of Muslim
leeches''.
Unless Thein Sein's government systematically cracks down on those who
promote and organize Islamophobic violence and hate speech and
effectively ends its long-standing policy of impunity for those who
commit crimes against Muslims (and other ethnic minorities), it will run
the risk of 969 morphing into a full-blown genocidal movement. Despite
its pretensions towards democracy, Thein Sein's military-propped regime
has over 50 years of proven experience in suppressing organized
opposition movements. For decades, the military was effectively able to
censor and stop any news or messages it didn't want disseminated in
society.
In his article "Challenging the Authoritarian State: Buddhist Monks and
Peaceful Protests in Burma, Issues and Policy", published in the
Fletcher Forum of World Affairs in 2008, Kyaw Yin Hlaing, a Burmese
academic from the City University of Hong Kong and now a top Thein Sein
adviser who directs the government's Myanmar Peace Center (MPC),
observed the military's central role in inciting anti-Muslim riots in
the past:
In 1997, the junta became aware of the monks' plan to protest against the regional (military) commander's improper renovation of a famous Buddhist statue in Mandalay. Before the monks could launch the protests, a rumor emerged that a Buddhist woman had been raped by a Muslim businessman. The government diverted their attention from the regional commander to the Muslim businessman, eventually causing an anti-Muslim riot. Some observers noted that that intelligence agents often instigate anti-Muslim riots in order to prevent angry Buddhist monks from engaging in anti-government activities. (pp. 137-138)
As recently as March 30, Professor Donald Seekin, the author of The
Disorder in Order: the Army-State in Burma since 1962, wrote, in a
response to a New York Times op-ed on March 29 entitled "Kristallnacht
in Myanmar":
Hatred of Muslims is deeply rooted in Burmese society, and was actively encouraged by both the Ne Win and SLORC/SPDC regimes during the 1962-2010 period. One of their favorite tactics was to spread rumors that Muslims had raped Burmese Buddhist women, and plotted to convert the entire Buddhist population to Islam. The "divide and rule" tactic used by the authorities in the recent past possibly grew out of the British colonial regime's policy of fostering a "plural society" with minimal national unity.
In light of the fact that Burma/Myanmar's military rulers have a
well-documented history of exploiting religious and ethnic prejudices in
the multi-ethnic society for their own political and strategic ends, it
is not necessarily conspiratorial to suggest that Thein Sein's
government may want such anti-Muslim sentiment spread in society for its
own political ends, including the notion that the public is unsafe
without the steady dictatorial hand of top generals and their military
in politics.
In spite of Thein Sein's softly-softly official messages of religious
harmony and coexistence in society, he has so far done virtually noting
to nip the neo-Nazi Buddhist movement of 969. Nor has the military
suddenly embraced unconditional free speech after overseeing decades of
harsh media censorship. Rather, the impunity and inaction are more
likely anchored in Naypyidaw's strategic calculation to create a general
climate of fear and uncertainty, consistent with the divide-and-rule
tactics it has always used to exert unrivaled control and influence over
the state and economy.
What is Aung San Suu Kyi, the global icon of non-violence, doing to stem
the tide of violent racism among her main Buddhist supporters?
Incomprehensibly, Suu Kyi herself is complicit in the spread of
Islamophobic hatred and fear, both by her silence over the violence
perpetuated against Muslims and by spreading moral responsibility for
the death and destruction across both Muslim and Buddhist communities.
For whatever reason, she has ignored blatant facts, including: 1) the
violence and hate campaigns are one-directional in that they target only
Muslims and are organized by Buddhist mobs which are made up of both
out-of-towners and local community members; 2) the Muslims (and other
minorities such as the Kachins) bear the brunt of the violence, death
and devastation; and 3) the military and security forces have 50 years
of experience in crowd control.
To be sure, Suu Kyi has not been entirely quiet on the anti-Muslim
violence. After the three days of attacks against Muslims in the central
town of Meikhtila, she spoke out in defense of the way the local
security forces handled the situation, despite widespread evidence
security forces sat on their hands while organized mobs went on sprees
of slaughter and arson. For three days, security forces let roaming
gangs of armed Buddhists burn down nearly 1,000 buildings, including
mosques, Muslim-owned businesses and houses. In her Burmese language
press interviews, Suu Kyi defended the deliberate inaction of the local
security forces, offering the excuse that they weren't experienced in
riot control in the country's new democratic context.
Despite serving as chairwoman of an inquiry of commission into protests
and violence at a Chinese and Myanmar military-invested copper mine in
central Burma/Myanmar, Suu Kyi's comment overlooked security forces'
recent use of firebombs laden white phosphorous to crack down on
protesters who lost their land and Buddhist monks who lent their
demonstration moral support. Rather than visiting Muslim victims of the
recent violence in Meikhtila, Suu Kyi instead attended the annual
military parade on March 27, where she shared intimate moments with
highly decorated generals.
Will recent rumors and violence persuade more people to participate in
anti-Muslim actions? And from where do these rumors claiming
expansionary designs of Islam in Burma/Myanmar originate?
Rumors have been the lifeblood of cultural and political life in
Burma/Myanmar for the past half-century, ever since the generals came to
power in the absence of elections and without a free and professional
press. The Burmese/Myanmar public soaks up rumors, slander and racist
narratives perpetuated by the military like a sponge. Even in the new
''reformist'' age, the free media is often jingoistic and has played a
key role in fomenting anti-Muslim hatred and nationalist fears.
Frighteningly for the country's Muslims - who make up about 4% of the
total 60 million population - one of President Thein Sein's own
spokespersons, ex-Major Zaw Htay, or Hmu Zaw, has served as a major
source of anti-Muslim rumors and slanders since the first wave of
violence against the Rohingya last June. On his Facebook page, the
spokesman for the President's Office has posted several one-liners
designed to stoke popular anti-Muslim hatred and fear. One example: "We
have just received information about a group of armed Muslim terrorists
who are crossing the Burmese-Bangladesh borders. Stay tune."
The state media, meanwhile, has published several articles with
anti-Muslim slants and used the word ''kalar'', the Burmese language
equivalent of "nigger", in referring to Muslims and people of Indian
subcontinental origin. With state security and propaganda agencies, as
well as culturally and ideologically influential figures, working in
unison to stoke anti-Muslim hatred and fear, public opinion naturally
follows.
Culturally, Buddhist monks are very influential in Burmese society -
more so than dissidents and generals. Ideologically, the racist public
tends to swallow the government's anti-Muslim rumors and narratives, in
spite of the fact that in most other cases they distrust
government-issued news and narratives.
It is extremely difficult to draw a line between the government's
anti-Muslim activities and propaganda and those carried out by
influential skinhead monks. Anti-Muslim postings on Facebook, including
those with images of the recent deaths and destruction in Meikhtila,
have been "liked" by thousands and solicit approving howls from Burmese
netizens who show no restraint in expressing their neo-Nazi views in
public on-line domains.
In recent interviews, Buddhist monk and 969 movement leader Wirathu has
seemed to condemn the violence and even claimed in cases he had stopped
rampaging, anti-Muslim rioters. Does this indicate he is toning down his
movement's rhetoric, or is the 969 movement still calling for the
elimination of Muslim influence in Burma/Myanmar?
In his Burmese language Facebook pages, Wirathu has posted several
irreconcilable messages. On certain mornings he has posted messages of
religious tolerance and compassion, while in the afternoon of the same
day he has written provocatively anti-Muslim statements, including
warnings against the "forced conversion of Burmese women who marry into
Muslim families" and are coerced into changing their names from Burmese
to Muslim and Indian ones.
It seems unlikely that a preacher like Wirathu, who was jailed for his
public incitement which resulted in the death of an entire Muslim family
in an arson attack in the small town called Kyauk Hse in 2003, would
suddenly feel repentance for his inflammatory rhetoric. To date he has
shown no sign of remorse or regret about his role in recent anti-Muslim
violence.
Ten years ago, Wirathu was a fringe figure, perceived as having fringe
anti-Muslim views. Now, with the rise of state-tolerated neo-Nazism, he
has emerged as a cultist hate-monger, and a must-meet for visiting
international media. The popularity of this neo-Nazi Buddhist preacher
does not augur well for the country's "democratic" future, and most
certainly not for its minority Muslims and Rohingyas.
Critical-minded locals have long been suspicious of Wirathu's reputed
close association with some of the previous regime's dodgiest officials
and ex-officials, including ex-chief of military intelligence Khin Nyunt
and the current leader of the ruling, military-linked Union Solidarity
and Development Party, ex-Brigadier General Aung Thaung. Those personal
ties would go a long way in explaining why Thein Sein's government has
failed to act while Buddhists lay waste to the country's minority
Muslims.
Maung Zarni is a Burmese activist blogger (www.maungzarni.com) and
visiting fellow of Civil Society and Human Security Research at the
London School of Economics.
This analysis report firstly published by Asia Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment