Myanmar Communal Violence- a Set back to Democratic Process

[email protected] (Ram Puniyani)
April 6, 2013

myanmarMost of the countries of South Asia have faced the barbaric problem of violence targeted against religious minorities. The form of this may have been different, but the outcome has been similar, the brutality against religious minorities, violence against innocent human beings. The current times (Mid 2013) may be one of the worst when in the spate of short span of we are witness to violence in Pakistan, Bangla Desh, India and Myanmar, more or less running parallel. Many a times when talk about violence involving Muslims has been under discussion, some propagandists have tried to associate Islam with violence and so the strife. Similarly some others may say that Hinduism permits violence as in Gita or so and so is the problem. In popular perception Buddhism is the religion of peace. The truth is that while the religious precepts are for morality, the part of religion invoked for violence has more to do with contemporary political issues, which are given the garb of religion. While Lord Gautama Buddha is surely the major apostle of peace, one has seen violence by Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka, Thailand and now overtly in Myanmar (March 2013).

Troops are keeping a vigil, martial law has been declared to stop the communal rage which has lasted for three days in Meikhatila in Myanmar. This violence has involved the Buddhists and Muslims.  Here the official toll stands at 31 dead, while the unofficial figures are higher.  A state of emergency has been declared in this state. As usual a trivial incident involving the argument between the Buddhist couple and a Muslim owner of gold shop resulted in the triggering of simmering dislikes and discord between these two communities resulting in violence. While one Buddhist monk has also been killed the major victims of the violence are Muslims. This bring to our memory the communal clash of June -July (2012) in Rakhine State in western Myanmar. In that violence officially 110 people were killed and it left 120,000 people homeless. Those killed and left homeless were mostly stateless Rohingya Muslims.

Interestingly the communal strife was under the wraps during the preceding dictatorial regime. With the efforts to bring in democracy in some form these strife's are coming to surface due to the diverse and plural nature of Myanmar society, which is majority Buddhist but has substantial number of Muslim minorities. Rohingiya Muslims are probably the most persecuted minority in the world. Being a substantial number in Myanmar, they are from Indo-Aryan group, who settled in this part over a period of last couple of centuries, during the British rule, primarily. While the majority Buddhists are of Sino-Tibetan stock.  Muslims live in the Western state of Rakhine state on country's Western border.  They have been adversely affected by the 1982 citizenship law, which has deprived them of the citizenship; there is a total violation of their human rights due to this unjust law. They are subjected to forced labour and have to work for the Government without any pay.  The UNHCR has noted that since 1991 their freedom of movement is restricted. They are treated like second class citizens. Facing this adverse situation of gross violation of their rights many of them are trying to flee to Thailand, Malaysia and other places amongst others.

In 2012, June-July the violence between Rakhine Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims was triggered by the rumour of rape of a Buddhist girl. As such it was a case of Muslim boy and Buddhist girl falling in love and eloping to get married. The boy was murdered and two of his friends who helped him to elope are facing death sentence.

Overall this reflects the unsolved problem of secularization and democracy in the region. The common factor in whole of South Asia is the migration of people for economic reasons, and with independence coming many of the dominating communities wanted to associate citizenship rights based on religion. Due to this some communities got deprived of citizenship formally or informally. Some were relegated to second class citizenship in practice. In Sri Lanka, the large number of Tamils who had gone there as plantation labour was denied equal rights and denied equality leading the extreme reaction in the form of formation of Liberation Tiger of Tamil Elam (LTTE).

In Myanmar 5% of the people are Muslims. Many of them had been the residents of this region from centuries. Denying them full citizenship defies all the logic of a modern democratic state. During the regime of military junta, which ruled the country for decades, a wrong precedent has been set, that of linking citizenship with religion. It requires deeper investigation as to why many a monks have an anti Islamic attitude. One knows similarly many a monks had played anti-Tamil role in Sri Lanka. There must be deeper societal processes which are at work and are usurping the democratic norms of equality of religions. One knows that democracy is coming up in Myanmar after long decades after long battles, but still the remnants of the communal divide are dogging this nascent democracy. In a way this is also the colonial legacy which subtly promoted the divisiveness in the society.

With this violence in Myanmar coming to the fore the whole South Asia has to wake up and come to the grips of the legacy of the colonial past, a legacy perpetuated due to economic and political policies of rulers, rulers who have in a short-sighted manner resorted to abuse of religious identity for their political goals. Some political tendencies have thrived on the identity of religions and spread the 'Hate' about 'other' community. It is retarding the process of development in each of South Asian countries and also putting strong brakes on the same. South Asia should have been striving towards the process of formation of South Asian Federation, which can expedite the processes leading to peace in the sub continent. Regional peace in turn is a prerequisite for development of the regions. We need to look beyond the narrow religious identities and promote the freedom of religion, equality of religions and dignity and honour for people of all the faiths for a better environment in those countries and a more congenial atmosphere for enhancement of human rights of weaker sections of society.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 20,2020

Washington D.C., Jan 20: An American bride asked for money from her invitees so that they can be on the 'exclusive guest list'.

Weddings can be surely expensive. But is it feasible for one to charge the guests to make up for the expenses?

According to Fox News, that is exactly what happened in a recent American wedding. A 19-year-old shared on Reddit that her cousin was getting married on Sunday and announced that she would charge 50 dollars to those who wanted to attend her wedding.

"She said that they can Venmo her money so there won't be no [sic] problems and everyone who paid will be added onto the 'exclusive guest list' which basically means you won't have to wait in line while other guests pay," wrote the user named DaintySheep.

While she refused to pay for entry into her cousin's wedding the bride-to-be contacted the elders in the family which ended up in an embarrassing situation.

"She wanted to get the money she spent on her special day back. I told her I wouldn't be able to come because this was outrageous and that I wish her well on her special day. She contacted my aunt and my aunt called me cheap and rude. My parents offered to pay for my entry, but I refused," continued the disheartened girl.

While in almost every nook and cranny of the world gifting the bride-groom with money is a tradition, asking for money from friends and family to replenish the money spent on a wedding is can be said to be a rare scenario.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 17,2020

Paris, Apr 17: Even as virologists zero in on the virus that causes COVID-19, a very basic question remains unanswered: do those who recover from the disease have immunity?

There is no clear answer to this question, experts say, even if many have assumed that contracting the potentially deadly disease confers immunity, at least for a while.

"Being immunised means that you have developed an immune response against a virus such that you can repulse it," explained Eric Vivier, a professor of immunology in the public hospital system in Marseilles.

"Our immune systems remember, which normally prevents you from being infected by the same virus later on."

For some viral diseases such a measles, overcoming the sickness confers immunity for life.

But for RNA-based viruses such as Sars-Cov-2 -- the scientific name for the bug that causes the COVID-19 disease -- it takes about three weeks to build up a sufficient quantity of antibodies, and even then they may provide protection for only a few months, Vivier told AFP.

At least that is the theory. In reality, the new coronavirus has thrown up one surprise after another, to the point where virologists and epidemiologists are sure of very little.

"We do not have the answers to that -- it's an unknown," Michael Ryan, executive director of the World Health Organization's Emergencies Programme said in a press conference this week when asked how long a recovered COVID-19 patient would have immunity.

"We would expect that to be a reasonable period of protection, but it is very difficult to say with a new virus -- we can only extrapolate from other coronaviruses, and even that data is quite limited."

For SARS, which killed about 800 people across the world in 2002 and 2003, recovered patients remained protected "for about three years, on average," Francois Balloux director of the Genetics Institute at University College London, said.

"One can certainly get reinfected, but after how much time? We'll only know retroactively."

A recent study from China that has not gone through peer review reported on rhesus monkeys that recovered from Sars-Cov-2 and did not get reinfected when exposed once again to the virus.

"But that doesn't really reveal anything," said Pasteur Institute researcher Frederic Tangy, noting that the experiment unfolded over only a month.

Indeed,several cases from South Korea -- one of the first countries hit by the new coronavirus -- found that patients who recovered from COVID-19 later tested positive for the virus.

But there are several ways to explain that outcome, scientists cautioned.

While it is not impossible that these individuals became infected a second time, there is little evidence this is what happened.

More likely, said Balloux, is that the virus never completely disappeared in the first place and remains -- dormant and asymptomatic -- as a "chronic infection", like herpes.

As tests for live virus and antibodies have not yet been perfected, it is also possible that these patients at some point tested "false negative" when in fact they had not rid themselves of the pathogen.

"That suggests that people remain infected for a long time -- several weeks," Balloux added. "That is not ideal."

Another pre-publication study that looked at 175 recovered patients in Shanghai showed different concentrations of protective antibodies 10 to 15 days after the onset of symptoms.

"But whether that antibody response actually means immunity is a separate question," commented Maria Van Kerhove, Technical Lead of the WHO Emergencies Programme.

"That's something we really need to better understand -- what does that antibody response look like in terms of immunity."

Indeed, a host of questions remain.

"We are at the stage of asking whether someone who has overcome COVID-19 is really that protected," said Jean-Francois Delfraissy, president of France's official science advisory board.

For Tangy, an even grimmer reality cannot be excluded.

"It is possible that the antibodies that someone develops against the virus could actually increase the risk of the disease becoming worse," he said, noting that the most serious symptoms come later, after the patient had formed antibodies.

For the moment, it is also unclear whose antibodies are more potent in beating back the disease: someone who nearly died, or someone with only light symptoms or even no symptoms at all. And does age make a difference?

Faced with all these uncertainties, some experts have doubts about the wisdom of persuing a "herd immunity" strategy such that the virus -- unable to find new victims -- peters out by itself when a majority of the population is immune.

"The only real solution for now is a vaccine," Archie Clements, a professor at Curtin University in Perth Australia, told AFP.

At the same time, laboratories are developing a slew of antibody tests to see what proportion of the population in different countries and regions have been contaminated.

Such an approach has been favoured in Britain and Finland, while in Germany some experts have floated the idea of an "immunity passport" that would allow people to go back to work.

"It's too premature at this point," said Saad Omer, a professor of infectious diseases at the Yale School of Medicine.

"We should be able to get clearer data very quickly -- in a couple of months -- when there will be reliable antibody tests with sensitivity and specificity."

One concern is "false positives" caused by the tests detecting antibodies unrelated to COVID-19.

The idea of immunity passports or certificates also raises ethical questions, researchers say.

"People who absolutely need to work -- to feed their families, for example -- could try to get infected," Balloux.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 13,2020

Bengaluru, Mar 13: In the wake of fresh cases of Covid-19 reported in Karnataka, Infosys Foundation chairperson Sudha Murty has urged the Karnataka government to take steps to shut malls and theatres, saying the coronavirus multiplies in air-conditioned areas.

In a letter to the government, she said preventive measures should be taken to control the spread of coronovirus before it gets worse.

Murty, who also leads the State government-constituted Karnataka Tourism Task Force, said she has discussed the current situation with Chairman and Executive Director of Narayana Health, Devi Prasad Shetty.

She suggested closure of all schools and colleges with immediate effect, malls, theatres and “all air-conditioned areas where the virus multiplies”, and allow only essential services like pharmacy, grocery and petrol bunks.

“It is not scientifically proven that the virus dies in high temperature,” she said pointing to spread of the virus -- despite heat -- in peak summer in Australia and Singapore, which have “summer all 12 months”.

“I request you to vacate one government hospital with at least 500 - 700 beds for this purpose (to deal with coronavirus cases), which requires oxygen lines and pipes,” she said.

“Infosys Foundation, the philanthropic and CSR arm of software major Infosys, would do the civil work and Devi Shetty has agreed to share resources like medical equipment,” she added.

“We would like to work with the government proactively so that we can prevent this as early as possible,” Sudha Murty said.

The total number of confirmed coronavirus positive cases in Karnataka is five, including the 76-year old man from Kalaburagi who died on Tuesday night.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.