The 18th CPC Congress: MYANMAR the Next Target for the US-led Globalization and the Strategic Encirclement of China?

Myanmar, Gas and the Soros-Funded Explosion of A Nation State

Early 2012 violent clashes between Muslim Rohingya and Buddhists broke out in Myanmar´s Rakhine State which is bordering to Bangladesh.

In 2011 Myanmar ended 49 years of military rule. It is slowly implementing political, social, legal and economical reforms. It has been troubled by supposed ethnic conflicts for decades; Remnants of the British Divide and Conquer Strategy, aggravated by world war two and modo-colonial influences.

It is the most rich country in the greater Mekong region in terms of natural resources. Yet it is one of the lowest ranking on the Social Development Index.

The end of military rule opened the doors for western corporations, NGOs, think-tanks, human rights organizations and to a greater influence of UN Agencies.

Many of them, UN-agencies included, are associated to and sponsored by the likes of the self-proclaimed philanthropist and multi-billionaire George Soros. 

Together they establish a loosely associated network, consisting of new local players and well established international players who are notorious for exploding targeted nations into ethnic violence.

Their philanthropy and advocacy for freedom, democracy and human rights has left a trail of ethnic violence, death and devastation from Bosnia and Kosovo to Nepal.

Is Myanmar´s geo-strategically significant location, a planned gas-pipeline, and its wealth in resources turning Myanmar into the next target for globalization and the strategic encirclement of China?

*********************************************************************** 

Independence and Common Denominators of Modo-Colonialism .

Myanmar became independent from British colonial rule in 1948. Two wars of global reach had depleted European nations’ military and economies. Maintaining colonial administrations had become too costly, cumbersome, expensive and unfeasible.

The divide and conquer strategy of colonialism had left the newly independent Myanmar to cope with internal conflicts which are still devastating national coherence, stability, peace as well as economical, social and political development. The 49 years of military rule in Myanmar  were in fact a by-product of western modo-colonialism and a nations defense against a protracted subversion.

After the end of the cold war, the peaceful transfer of Hon-Kong to Chinese rule, the gradual transformation of the Chinese economy, and the expansion of the Chinese economy into the markets of former western colonies in Africa and Asia, the internal conflicts in Myanmar acquired new dimensions.

The meta-dimensions of a US/NATO ambition for global, full spectrum dominance, the dimension of Myanmar´s  natural resources, the dimension of a gas-pipeline project, and the meta-dimensions of Myanmar as a nation that is being targeted as part of the US/NATO strategic encirclement of China.

Every western-backed subversion common denominators. The involvement of foreign nations, the instrumentalization of local elements, and the goal to control resources, economy, and geo-politically as well as strategically significant locations. The product is internal conflict based on diversity and the manufacturing of a crisis that lends apparent legitimacy to calls for political, economic or military interventions.

Western media manufacture popular consent for interventions by eliciting a fabled advocacy for stability, human rights and democracy. Stability and human rights are the modern propagandists tool for manufacturing apparent legitimacy for aggressive modo-colonial subversion, invasion, long-term military presence and control.

The strategy has been successfully implemented in Bosnia and Kosovo. In 2010 and 2011 it was successfully implemented in Ivory Coast and Libya.[i] It is currently being used against Syria and fermented and Nepal.[ii] It has been fermented in Myanmar for decades and the recent violent clashes, supposedly between the 2012 clashes between the Muslim Rohingya and Buddhists signal that yet another attempt is made to explode the country.

The ethnic or religious violence between the Rohigya and Buddhists in 2012 is, as it will become evident below, a function of western imperialists to destabilize Burmese national reconciliation and to derail attempts to find a Burmese and Asian solution for Myanmar´s problems within a the regional framework of ASEAN.

The policy of obstructing an ASEAN, Myanmar, Thailand, China brokered solution began being implemented by the USA during the administration of G.W. Bush.

As we will see below, the Bush administration was involved in an attempted subversion in Rakhine State in collusion with intelligence services of Bangladesh and Pakistan. While the entire nation is targeted for subversion the specific function of the clashes however, is to gain control over Rakhine State and its abundant oil and gas resources.

Ethnic Awareness in Myanmar, the Root Causes for Ethnic Awareness and Conflict in Myanmar, and the Obstruction of National Consolidation of Myanmar within a Regional Paradigm by US/NATO Imperialism. 

Myanmar can look back at a more than one thousand year long history as empire and nation. In fact it can be argued that Myanmar, even though several ethnic groups are represented in it, has developed an actual national identity and national awareness long before the first European nation states were created.

A national awareness based on ethnicity developed first after years of British colonial rule. It was fermented and aggravated by Britain as a standard colonialist instrument for social and political control.

The first to develop national awareness based on so-called ethnicity were the Burman and the Karen during the early 1900s. The development resulted in ethnic groups demanding representation within various colonial institutions that were being introduced by the British.

One could argue the British genius of making the Burmese people themselves demand the institutionalization of colonialists primary instrument of control.

National awareness along ethnic lines was heightened during the 1930s development of ultra nationalism in Germany, Italy and Japan and the Japanese-Thai occupation of Myanmar.

The developments during colonialism and world war two resulted in agony between Japanese-fostered anti western and partially anti-Chinese ethnicity based nationalism in i.e. Burman, Shan, Rakhine, and an Allied-fostered ethnicity based nationalism in Karen and Kachin.

The majority of the ruling elite in the Karen State are either Christians or have close ties to Christian communities and Britain. Many Burmese considered the Karen elite as collaborators with the colonialists and during the Japanese-Thai occupation of Myanmar many of them were persecuted.

This situation was exacerbated due to the fact that the British, when leaving Myanmar, negotiated a settlement with the non-communist former Japanese allies. It came to armed clashes between Karen and mainly Burman militia. Infighting began as an artifact of colonialism and the occupation of Myanmar by Japan.

The tragic reality of post-colonial and post-war Myanmar is that the still ongoing violence in Karen State and other regions has nothing whatsoever to do with ethnicity or ethnicity based nationalism.

The conflict, including the countless death and maimed, the decades of suffering of Karen in refugee camps in Thailand, the devastating impact of the conflict on social and political development and for the national coherence and security of Myanmar are an artifact of foreign colonial and occupying powers cynical use of the divide and conquer strategy.

On a positive note, it may well be the recognition of this fact that holds the key to national reconciliation.

There is no doubt that atrocities, human rights violations, and serious crimes have been committed on all sides of the decades long conflicts. One-sided western criticism of the military government and the new civilian government in Myanmar however, do not contribute to conflict resolution and national reconciliation.

It transpires with ever more clarity that this criticism is not intended to contribute to reconciliation.

On the contrary, as it will become evident below, further conflicts are being fermented with the aid of foreign interests, domestic players, United Nations Agencies, including the Soros funded UN Framework Team for Preventive Action, and western funded NGOs which are notorious for justifying western sanctions and interventions on the basis of the very conflicts they manufacture and aggravate.

Myanmar, Gas/Oil-Pipelines and Explosive Energy

Myanmar is currently involved in two international pipeline projects which to a certain degree are in competition with each other. The Myanmar-Bangladesh-India (MBI) pipeline project which is transporting gas from Myanmar to Bangladesh and India, and the dual Oil&Gas China-Myanmar pipelines.

Due to a lack of convergence in the energy and security needs of India and Bangladesh the MBI project was initially met with considerable resistance from Bangladesh.Bangladesh considered that the deliveries of gas to India threatened both the energy and security needs of Bangladesh.

Bangladesh first agreed to the project in 2010, after new and more accurate estimates of the available gas reserves had been accumulated, and after a new contract had been negotiated.

Another motivating factor for Bangladesh to finally agree to the MBI project in 2010 is the fact that the China-Myanmar pipeline project reduced the available amount of gas reserves for export to Bangladesh and India.

While the first project, the MBI has predominantly regional implications, the second project, the China-Myanmar dual Oil & Gas pipeline, is not well perceived by western energy cartels and the US-Administration whom the project causes grave concerns with regards to the US/NATO strategic encirclement of China.

The pipeline is considered yet another in China´s “String of Pearls”, as a defense department commissioned study calls China´s regional interests.[iii] 

In 2012 violent clashes erupted in Rakhine State; supposedly between the predominantly Muslim Rohingya who are demanding that they no longer be considered as foreigners and refugees, and that Myanmar should grant them Burmese citizenship, and Buddhists who supposedly want to oppress the Rohingya´s legitimate aspirations.

Among the victims of the violence were Rohingya, Buddhists as well as Burmese police and security forces.

As already discussed above, non of the presumably ethnic conflicts that have destabilized Myanmar for decades were or are ethnic conflicts. An analysis of the supposedly religious and ethnic conflict between the Rohingya and Buddhists will show that the causes of the violence and conflict have nothing whatsoever to do with religion or ethnicity, and that this conflict shares a common denominator with all other internal conflicts in Myanmar.

Foreign influences that use internal factors to destabilize the country.

To gain an in depth understanding of the so-called Rohingya – Buddhist violence it is necessary to briefly review the recent history of Bangladesh, its transformation from secular state to Islamic state , the interplay between internal developments and the US/CIA war on the USSR, the rise of Islamic extremism in Afghanistan and Bangladesh, and the position of the Rohingya within this context.

The development of a feasible model for conflict resolution, which necessarily must take cultural, humanitarian, as well as security concerns of Myanmar into account is not possible without a prior analysis of this context.

Social Injustice in Bangladesh, The US-Manufacturing of Islamist Terrorism, Abuse of the Rohingya for the Subversion of Myanmar and the Strategic Encirclement of China.

After a protracted war with Pakistan the largely secular and nationalist forces in Bangladesh won independence in 1971. In 1972 Bangladesh received its first constitution. It was based on democratic principles, nationalism, human rights and secularism.

Strong forces within the powerful military of Bangladesh however, soon embarked on a project of turning the secular state into an despotic Islamic state. The project was opposed by both the majority of nationalists, secularists, as well as by the many of the religious communities in the country.

 

 

During the twentieth century Bangladesh experienced internal conflicts based on social issues. The conflicts developed into ethnic, racial and religious conflicts. The country had previously experienced considerable violence based on ethnic, religious and social issues.

Racial, ethnic and religious violence resulted in the encouragement of migration as well as the forced displacement of segments of the population. The Islamic elites anti-secularism of that period spilled over into the post-liberation military as well as into domestic politics of the newly created state of Bangladesh.

As usual in such situations neither the ordinary peaceful Muslim, Hindu, Secular or other segments of the population had much or any influence on this development. In fact, secularism and tolerance for religious diversity had been practiced in the region for centuries.

Dictators as well as nationalist politicians began abusing Islam as instrument of social and political control and for consolidating power structures. The abuse of Islam for consolidating political power and a decade long Maoist insurrection in western Bangladesh created the basis for the development of radical Islamic movements in rural districts.

Radicalized Islamist movements began receiving substantial funding from Saudi-Arabia and oil-billionaires who funded the spread of the radical and extremist Wahabi branch of Islam. Also the Qatar-based international wing of the Muslim Brotherhood soon became active in Bangladesh, financing, recruiting, arming and training youth for Jihad.

Bangladesh developed into a hot-bed of militant Islamic movements and a major exporter of Jihadi idealists and mercenaries. During the war against the USSR backed Democratic Republic of Afghanistan thousands of Bangladeshi youth were recruited for Holy War against “the infidels”.

Many of them were recruited into the CIA created Al-Qaeda network led by Osama bin Ladin. The facilitators of the recruitment were the CIA, the Pakistani ISI as well as the Military Intelligence Service of Bangladesh, DGFI.

The recruitment potential for young “Freedom Fighters” in Bangladesh was enormous. Being one of the lowest ranking nations on the Social Development Index and with lack of access to adequate education for the socio-economically under-privileged and staggering unemployment rates, Bangladesh was to become one of the primary exporters of Al-Qaeda operatives and mercenaries.

Many of them were then, and still are unwittingly recruited into fighting wars on behalf of US/NATO-Imperialism.

The DGFI´s involvement in Afghanistan began accumulating vast sums of revenues from the lucrative drugs and arms trade.

In 1978, expecting that the military government of neighboring Myanmar was weakened by internal conflicts, aware of the fact that the neighboring Rakhine State was rich in natural gas and oil resources, and aware of the fact that the previously very small population of Rohingya in Rakhine State had grown in numbers due to a large influx of Rohingya who had been displaced during the internal conflicts in Bangladesh in 1943, the DGFI embarked on the mission of radicalizing the Rohingya in Rakhine State.

The goal was the establishment of a Rohingya State with a Bangladesh controlled proxy-government that would give Bangladesh access to Myanmar’s rich oil and gas reserves in the region.

The criminal abuse of the displaced Bangladeshi Rohingya population in Rakhine State had the direct approval of the USA.

The plan was designed by the Military Leader of Bangladesh, General Ziaur Rahman with assistance from the CIA. The execution of the subversion was delegated to Brigadier general Nurul Islam Shishu. Diplomatic ties between Myanmar and Bangladesh froze when Myanmar expelled the military attache of Bangladesh and the Burmese military forced many of the militant Rohingya to flee back to Bangladesh.

Atrocities were committed on both sides. The government of Myanmar however, was positioned as the villain by western governments and became the focus point of a western media coverage which at best can be described as one sided and less euphemistically as well designed propaganda to cover up the fact that the USA and Bangladesh had criminally abused a refugee population to manufacture a subversion. The situation escalated in border clashes.

If Bangladesh was a hot-bed of terrorism then, after the so-called war on terror and the war on Afghanistan, Bangladesh became one of the primary bases of operations of Al-Qaeda. Al Qaeda operatives and mercenaries from Bangladesh were among other involved in missions in the Ache province of Indonesia, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Myanmar, Chechnya, Egypt, India, Kashmir, Tajikistan.

The coordination is mainly organized through the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islam network, (HuJI). Besides these operations, Al-Qaeda fighters recruited via Bangladesh took part in the successful 2011 NATO/GCC backed subversion of Libya, and they are currently taking part in the ongoing subversion of the Syrian Arab Republic.

Both the US´s CIA and DIA, Pakistan´s ISI and the DGFI play significant roles in coordinating Al-Qaeda operations via Bangladesh, although deteriorating ties between Pakistan and the USA have reduced the role of the ISI and contributed to an influx of  Al-Qaeda operatives in Bangladesh.

The fermenting of a new subversion in Myanmar´s Rakhine State is among other organized  through Rohingya camps of the militant, intelligence supervised Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) in Bangladesh. The camps have experienced a significant influx of Al-Qaeda associated Islamist organizations and fighters.

The 2012 violence in Rakhine State can not be understood independently from its causes. The above mentioned dimensions are also a precondition for fully understanding the role of Aung San Suu Kyi, international and Burmese media, NGOs and UN-Agencies in the attempted subversion.

Myanmar, Political reforms in a targeted nation 

 

 

The primary problem for the former military and present civilian government in Myanmar could be reduced to the following. Lack of political, social, legal and economical reform and development is reenforcing the subversion. Much needed reforms increase the likelihood of a successful subversion.

Lack of pluralistic or more representative political processes have resulted in the permeation of political, administrative, legal, economical and other systems by military and military associated cartels. Reforms will be met with inertia from those who are the beneficiaries of these structures.

The political influence of the military stands between a successful subversion and national sovereignty, integrity, security and genuine reform. Implementing political reforms under such circumstances is not only extremely difficult but also inherently dangerous for national security. 

The case of Aung San Suu Kyi is a prime example for how the attempted subversion of a nation drives a political opposition into the camp of the subversion, and how the subversion influences a political opposition.

No other case in recent history is in fact more exemplary for this interplay. The prospect of implementing peaceful political reforms in Myanmar has suffered considerably from it for decades.

In the West, Aung San Suu Kyi is the most prominent Burmese pro-democracy and human rights activist. Western governments and media have made her into an icon of freedom. A heroin under house arrest, Nobel Peace Laureate and into a “beacon of hope” for freedom and democracy in Myanmar. 

In fact, Suu Kyi has been developed into a franchise or icon under whose banner it is possible to position the government of Myanmar as villains while waging an undeclared war on the country. From a Public Relations perspective it was a disaster for the military government to keep Suu Kyi under house arrest.

From the perspective of national security she would have been of grave danger to the country´s national coherence, stability and security had she been released before a peaceful transition to a civilian government could be safely implemented.

Unless Suu Kyi and her party are willing and able to adjust to the reforms by re-aligning their policy towards national sovereignty and regional integration of Myanmar, Suu Kyi and the party will remain a threat to national sovereignty as well as national and regional security.

Whether one supports her or not, Aung San Suu Kyi has been and will be playing a significant role in the politics of Myanmar. Her position, function and influence can only be understood and used to the benefit of Myanmar when it is being taken into account that she is both representing a consortium of power-brokers who are trying to destabilize Myanmar, and that she is a willing victim, but never the less a victim of circumstances.

The circumstances of being a prolific politician in a country that has had a repressive government because it was under attack. The circumstance of having been targeted as asset as much as she herself needed those whose interest it is to destabilize Myanmar. 

The next coming years will show if Suu Kyi is able and willing to abandon some of the most subversive of the allies that have supported her over the last decades or not. Her decisions will be crucial for how swiftly comprehensive reforms can be implemented safely.

Sadly it looks as if the subversive network, reaching from the US-State Department over the United Nations to the National Endowment for Democracy, Human Rights Watch, and a cohort of Soros-Funded NGOs has such a degree of control over Suu Kyi and her party, that it will be virtually impossible for them to work for the best interest of Myanmar and its national integrity and security, even if she wanted to. 

Enter Soros 

Suu Kyi´s main sponsor over the last decades is the George Soros. In 2012 George Soros opened his first office in Myanmar.[iv] Soros stated that he has had talks with “Pro-Democracy Leader Suu Kyi” and that they had agreed that he would open the office. The full bearing of this “deal” becomes evident when having a look at the range of organizations, initiatives and agencies in Burma which are Soros-Funded.

Soros-Funded organizations in Myanmar include, the Open Society Foundation, Mizzima News, Burma News International, Human Rights Watch, Initiatives to promote the education of young journalists, stipends for students, fellowships at institutes which are notorious for their involvement in subversion and not to forget, UN-Agencies. 

Other organizations in support of Suu Kyi are Amnesty International, whose Director for Amnesty International USA, Suzanne Nozzel, is Hillary Clinton´s and the US State Departments adviser for NGO – Governmental relations, the Clinton Global Initiative, and the Burma Campaign UK, whose 2006 report clearly shows that it is financed by the very globalist forces that are targeting Burma for subversion.[v]

How all pervasive this globalist, predominantly Soros-Funded network against Myanmar is and how it interfaces with the radicalization of the Rohingya via Bangladesh and Bangladesh supervised and sponsored Al-Qaeda operatives and mercenaries becomes evident when having a closer look at the track record of the also Soros-Funded United Nations Interagency Framework Team for Preventive Action, short FT. [vi] 

The Soros-Funded Framework Team is a UN-Agency which is overseeing the cooperation of UN-Agencies on international, regional and national levels. It is also supervising and coordinating the interplay and cooperation between UN-Agencies and NGOs such as Human Rights Watch, the Open Society Foundation, Amnesty International, Burma Campaign and numerous others.

The FT has been instrumental in the fermenting and explosion of ethnic violence in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Today that FT is actively involved in fermenting ethnic and religious violence in Nepal, Myanmar and numerous other targeted nations.

Example Nepal

To provide an understanding of how the UN Framework Team for Preventive Action is complicit in the fermenting and exploding ethnic and religious violence in targeted nations Nepal is a prime example and worth investigating in great detail.

In 2006 a protracted armed popular struggle for political reforms in Nepal ended successfully with the victory of the United Communist Party of Nepal – Maoist against the Nepali Monarchy. A pluralistic and representative form of government was installed, elections held, in which the party won over 40 % of the parliamentary seats.

Other communist parties were represented in a coalition government. The former centralist governmental structures should be reformed, power delegated to regions and communities. A commission was formed and the UN Framework Team became involved. The amount of UN-Agencies and NGOs that became involved in Nepal grew exponentially.

Nepal has a hundreds of years old history of tolerant and peaceful co-existence of ethnic and religious communities. Over 100 religions and 300 casts are represented in the country.

With the “help” of the UN Framework Team for Preventive Action and NGOs which lobbied for an ethnicity and religion based “fair distribution of landownership”, such as NEFIN, the population was made suspicious and envious of each other.

In fact, the very same head of the FT in Nepal, Ian Martin, is the person who has been responsible for the same subversion strategy in Bosnia Herzegovina where it resulted in serious ethnic violence and civil war.

An originally planned six districts plan for Nepal was opposed. Eleven regions were suggested. The problem is, that regardless how one divides Nepal along ethnic and religious lines there will always be elements of one group being a minority within the supposed “territory or the other”. Ethnic violence erupted in Nepal, implemented with the aid of CIA associated Islamic extremists and in collusion with the UN Drug Agency.

It is precisely the same model, and precisely the same Soros-Funded network of UN-Agencies and loosely associated NGOs, as well as Al-Qaeda associated, intelligence controlled network of Islamic extremists that is behind the eruption of the violence in Rakhine State and the planned subversion of Myanmar.

2012 Violence in Rakhine State and Involvement of UN-Employees

The violence in Rakhine State, supposedly between Muslim Rohingya and Buddhists, has been planned and executed in collusion between the Al-Qaeda associated Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islam (HuJI) and the Rohingya Solidarity Organization. The basis of operations for these organizations and for the violence are Rohingya camps in Bangladesh.

Both organizations as well as the camps are under supervision of Bangladesh´s intelligence service,  DGFI. The violence has been incited in an attempt to destabilize regional gas-pipeline projects which contradict the energy policy of Bangladesh and the US/NATO strategic encirclement of China.

July 2012 authorities in Rakhine State arrested two UN Employees. Although the reason for their arrest was kept as quiet as possible by both the United Nations and the government of Myanmar to avoid a diplomatic scandal, it is a well established fact that the UNHCR and the WFP employees were working as intelligence agents for a foreign nation and that both were directly involved in the manufacturing and aggravation of the so-called ethnic clashes.

On 27 August 2012 both were sentenced by a court in Maungdaw, Myanmar. The United Nations insists that the two are treated in accordance with all applicable international conventions and immunities they may be entitled too.

Immunity however, is not applicable when UN-Staff has abused the privileges that are granted to the United Nations for espionage and the subversion of a nations territorial sovereignty.

The arrest and subsequent sentencing of the UN staffers indicates that the government of Myanmar is self-confident and signaling that it will not accept a Bosnia-Herzegovina or Nepal style subversion of national sovereignty by manufacturing ethnic or religious violence.

It is also a healthy indication of Myanmar´s functioning anti-terrorism and counter-insurgency structures. It has after all, had decades with foreign backed terrorism and subversion to develop them.

Solving “The Rohingya Problem” and Protecting National Sovereignty and Human Rights 

Even many otherwise progressive western intellectuals who are aware of the complexity of international, state-sponsored terrorism operations, such as Arabist and Islamologist Dr. Kevin Barret are making blanketing statements about “the Muslim – Buddhist Clashes” about “The Rohingya” and about “The Brutal Regime”.

In a recent article, The US rewarding Myanmar for massacring Muslims, published by Iran´s Press TV on 26 August, Prof. Kevin Barret wrote something to the effect of:

“The Rohingya should just bee granted citizenship which they are entitled to under international law. That will solve the problem for the Rohingya and Myanmar.  Muslims and Buddhists ought to unite against fanaticism driven nationalism of the regime”.[vii]

Blanketing statements, demands, and subsequent calls for public action against the government of Myanmar such as those of Dr. Barret are symptomatic for a misinformed US-American and western public and representative for numerous western scholars simplistic approach to conflict resolution.

Moreover, these blanketing statements and demands reenforce the problem rather than offering constructive and feasible solutions.

Primary Considerations for Conflict Resolution Models

Myanmar´s Rakhine State has had a population of Muslim Rohingya for centuries. The vast majority of these Rohingya is well integrated into Myanmar´s society and they enjoy the rights which follow with citizenship of Myanmar, including religious freedom. This population is suffering as much as any other of Myanmar´s citizens from the political, social and economical consequences of decades of conflicts and sanctions.

The Rohingya which fled to Myanmar during the social, ethnic and religious violence in Bangladesh during the 1940s have partially been integrated into the civil society of Myanmar. The majority however, is living in both formal and informal refugee camps in Rakhine State. They enjoy  protection under international law as well as Burmese law as refugees.

Myanmar has no obligation under international law to blanketing grants of citizenship to this population. There is no doubt that the condition of many refugee populations throughout the world is tragic but the problem of displacement due to violence is not solved by sweeping measures such as automatically granting citizenship in host nations.

Taking into account that Bangladesh previously has attempted to establish a Rohingya State on Myanmar´s territory and to install a proxy-government to control Myanmar´s oil and gas resources makes considerations about the status of the Rohingya refugee population in Myanmar particularly complex and difficult.

The average Rohingya refugee in Myanmar is most certainly not served by imposing additional hardships on them by unleashing a CIA/DGFI supervised Al-Qaeda insurgency which forces the government of Myanmar to implement sharper controls with the refugee population.

The unethical and criminal abuse of human rights by western governments, UN-agencies and NGOs to cover over insurgencies and subversion and to justify sanctions and interventions is not solving the problems of the Rohingya and imposing the danger of victimizing them as pawns in a covert war on them.

A resolution to the Rohingya´s problem in Myanmar can not be found without clarifying the role of Bangladesh, the UN, western intelligence services, and state sponsored terrorism in Bangladesh. Any constructive suggestions for resolving the problems of the Rohingya must take the underlying causes for their situation into account. Failing to take these underlying causes into account would in deed be failing the Rohingya and the People of Myanmar.

 

Dr. Christof Lehmann

 

 

Endnotes 

Sharing is caring!