• North Korea launches missile despite US tensions

    Breaking News: Defiant Pyongyang fires suspected ICBM despite US warnings, but projectile reportedly blows up on take off in failure.

  • This is default featured slide 2 title

    Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

  • This is default featured slide 3 title

    Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

  • This is default featured slide 4 title

    Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

  • This is default featured slide 5 title

    Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

10 February, 2018

U.N. says Reuters report on Myanmar massacre 'alarming,' need for investigation

Image may contain: 3 people, grass, outdoor and nature

 Reuters Staff


UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United Nations on Friday described the details of a Reuters investigation into the killing of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar as “alarming” and said it showed the need for a thorough probe into the violence in the country’s Rakhine state.
 Ten Rohingya Muslim men with their hands bound kneel as members of the Myanmar                      security forces stand guard in Inn Din village September 2, 2017. Handout via REUTERS
“We’re aware of this latest report, the details of which are very alarming. This once more attests to the need for a full and thorough investigation by the authorities of all violence in Rakhine State and attacks on the various communities there,” U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq told reporters.
U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has called for the release of the two detained journalists and continues to press for that, Haq said.


Share:

Re: Oxford U. Press, Myanmar Genocide & Its Choice of Dr Leider as the Expert on Rohingyas




















5 February 2018 
We, the undersigned group of scholars and rights campaigners, are disturbed by the fact that OUP’s Oxford Research Encyclopedias (ORE) Asian History series has commissioned Dr Jacques Leider, head of the Bangkok-based Ecole Française de l’ Extrême-Orient (EFEO) and a well-known advisor to the Myanmar military’s Armed Forces Historical Museum in Naypyidaw, to write a reference article on the subject of the Rohingya people in the forthcoming series: the ORE Asian History (under “Political”, see “Rohingya: Emergence and Vicissitudes of a Communal Muslim Identity in Myanmar (Jacques Leider), forthcoming Jan–Mar 2018”, found 03 February 2018 
As you know, the Tatmadaw (the official name of the Myanmar armed forces) has been credibly accused of committing crimes under international law including crimes against humanity and even the crime of all crimes, genocide, against the predominantly Muslim Rohingya. 
As you also know, the Oxford University Press (OUP) has a very well-earned reputation for fairness and authority in the fields in which they publish reference material. Anything published by OUP online about the Rohingya and Myanmar will be given a great deal of credibility by both scholars and the general public and carry a great deal of weight in any ongoing disputes over the exact legal name of the crimes against this world’s largest stateless population whose group identity and historical presence is being erased officially and popularly in Myanmar. 
We therefore draw your attention to our following concerns regarding your selection of Dr Jacques Leider to write a reference article for the ORE Asian History series: 
(1) We find that positions taken by Dr Leider in interviews with the press, in public talks and in published articles raise serious questions about his objectivity regarding the Rohingya and their history. His well-documented pattern of denials that the Myanmar military-directed mass violence and scorched-earth military operations against the Rohingya community – the subject of his ORE article – is challenged by the growing body of legal analyses and human rights research reports which point to the fact that Myanmar’s persecution of the Rohingya as a group amounts to international crimes including crimes against humanity and genocide. 
(2) We believe that televised appearances by Dr Leider with military and government officials condoning state policies against the Rohingya give the appearance to the viewing public that he validates views that underlie the Myanmar military's ousting in 2017 of 680,000 people and the massacre of Rohingya for which the military has recently admitted responsibility. A recent English-Burmese bilingual book entitled “Talk on Rakhine Issue: Discussion on Finding Solutions” published by the Ministry of Defence’s Myawaddy News Group in Myanmar highlights the fact, in photos and text, that Dr Leider was the only foreign expert to participate in the strategic discussion organized by this official propaganda organ of the Myanmar MOD in the first month of what the United Nations officially described as “ethnic cleansing” of the Rohingya. On 7 and 8 September 2017, Dr Leider was on stage seated with two ex-Lt-Colonels named Than Aye and Ko Ko Hlaing (respectively, ex-officer-in-charge of the strategic affairs unit and the ex-adviser to the former General and former President Thein Sein 2010-15) in the Myanmar capital Naypyidaw at the said invitation-only event billed as “Talk on Rakhine Issue: Discussion on Finding Solutions”. 
In the introduction of the aforementioned book published by the Myanmar Military, the position of Myanmar regarding the actions taken against the Rohingya – which have been abundantly documented and assessed as egregious human rights violations by six successive UN Special Rapporteurs on the human rights situation in Myanmar since 1992 as well as by the world’s leading human rights monitors such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch – is presented as a legitimate course of action (that is, by the Myanmar military to defend the country against Islam’s attempt to expand its demographic power base and dominate the world; see supra at p. 4 “Talk on Rakhine Issues”, Ministry of Defence Myawaddy News Group). 
In these strategic discussions, ex-Colonel Ko Ko Hlaing openly singled out Oxford University as a very influential institution which hosted an international conference on the Rohingya where knowledge about the Rohingya (history, identity and repression) was discussed and disseminated. By this, he implied that Oxford University – and other similarly influential entities – is somewhere that the Myanmar military needs to try to make strategic inroads to promote its official denial both of Rohingya identity and history, and of the state-directed terror and expulsion. 
The audience was mainly composed of officials from the Ministry of Defence. Myanmar’s official and popular Islamophobia – whereby Muslims have been scapegoated in the same way as the Jews were in the old Europe – is well-documented in scholarly and human rights literature. These discussions took place at the time Leider’s host organization (the Myanmar military) was responsible for the violent deaths of “at least 6,700 Rohingya, in the most conservative estimations […] including at least 730 children below the age of five years,” in the first month alone of the military operations conducted in Northern Rakhine state of Myanmar (i.e. from 25 August to 24 September 2017), according to the findings from a limited survey carried out by the international humanitarian NGO Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) among the survivors of this wave of ethnic cleansing who are now in refugee camps in Chittagong, Bangladesh (see “Myanmar/Bangladesh: MSF surveys estimate that at least 6,700 Rohingya were killed during the attacks in Myanmar” http://www.msf.org/en/article/myanmarbangladesh-msf-surveys-estimate-least-6700-rohingya-were-killed-during-attacks ). 
(3) Dr Leider’s insistence (see “History Behind Rakhine State Conflict” https://www.irrawaddy.com/from-the-archive/history-behind-rakhine-state-conflict.html “The Frictions in the Rakhine State Are Less About Islamophobia Than Rohingya-Phobia” https://thewire.in/182611/frictions-rakhine-state-less-islamophobia-rohingya-phobia/ , and “The Truth About Myanmar’s Rohingya Issue” https://thediplomat.com/2016/03/the-truth-about-myanmars-rohingya-issue/ ) that Rohingya identity – not Rakhine or the majority Burmese – be critically scrutinized as a political identity born out of political and communal conflict indicates a bias against Rohingya claims of their long documented history of settled existence in Rakhine state. This pronounced bias (in addition to his evident relations with the Myanmar military) should have raised doubts about his appropriateness to write a reference article about the Rohingya. We perceive in Dr Leider’s writings and public statements an unconcealed bias against Muslim Rohingyas, which results in his dismissal or wilful ignorance of irrefutable (and easily accessible) evidence that effectively undermines his thesis which is that the Rohingya, unlike other “genuinely ethnic identities”, were manufactured by Muslim fighters or Mujahideens in the post-independence period of the 1950’s. For instance, Dr Leider labels it a “delusion” that the Government of the Union of Burma recognized the Rohingya as a constitutive ethnic group of the Union following the surrender of the separatist Mujahideen in July 1961. The irrefutable fact is this: as late as 1964, the Government of Burma officially included the Rohingya as an ethnic group of Burma in its official Burmese language “Encyclopaedia Myanmar” (V. 9). In addition, the Rohingya were granted a slot on the country’s sole broadcasting station known as the Burma Broadcasting Service (BBS) as an indigenous language programme, broadcast three times per week, alongside other indigenous languages such as Shan, Lahu, etc., until the 3rd year (1964) of the military rule of General Ne Win. 
The readily accessible official documentation supports the Rohingya’s collective claim that they were officially recognized as an ethnic group of the Union of Burma, from which follows the conclusion that it is the State of Myanmar that has embarked on the project of erasing Rohingya ethnic identity, their history and presence which predates the formation of the post-colonial state of the Union of Burma in 1948. Dr Leider’s choice to ignore these primary and official sources regarding Rohingya ethnic identity and nationality further reinforces Myanmar’s institutionalized propaganda and Fake News that the Rohingya do not exist as an ethnic nationality, while lending a veneer of objective scholarly authority. We observe, further, that there is an alarming parallel between Myanmar’s de-nationalization and identity destruction and the German de-nationalization of the Jewish population under Nazi rule. 
(4) Genocide denial is a crime in countries such as Germany. Although there is no UK or international law against which the denial of state-directed crimes against humanity, including genocide, of the Rohingya can be judged, the consensus is emerging among the world’s leading institutions and scholars in the field of genocide studies – from the US Holocaust Memorial Museum and Yale University Human Rights Law Clinic, the University of Washington Law School, the Queen Mary University of London International State Crimes Initiative to the Russell-Sartre-inspired Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal on Myanmar – that Myanmar is responsible for genocide. Even the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has expressly stated that he is “not ruling out” that genocide is being committed against the Rohingya. Yet, despite the well-publicized findings by world-renowned research institutes and scholars of genocide, Dr Leider dismisses them. He also fails to acknowledge that Myanmar’s majoritarian racism among the country’s Buddhists is violent. He characterises Buddhist racism towards the Rohingya as merely “strong sentiment”. 
We do not deny that Dr Leider, like anyone else, has a right to comment on the Rohingya or any other topic, but when someone takes such a strong position against the historicity of one group's claims regarding ethnicity/identity (and only one group's in a context of conflict between two or more groups), it seems unfair that they should be commissioned for a project to write an article on the ethnic group in question that seeks to present itself as a fair and unbiased reference source. The ORE is certainly not an appropriate vehicle in which to publish such views. Indeed, OUP should have nothing to do with them. 
We note also that OUP appears only to have commissioned an article on the Rohingya and not on the Rakhine Buddhist community whose ethnic claims, we understand, are no stronger than those of the Rohingya. It is hard to interpret this as other than OUP’s taking a stand in favour of the Myanmar military and against the Rohingya for reasons unclear and that OUP supports, at least indirectly, the current ethnic cleansing which Dr Leider's writings and media appearances are used to deny. 
Finally, it needs to be stressed that there is something more consequential than our objection per se to OUP’s commissioning a reference article by Dr Leider on the target of the Myanmar military's repression. That is the question whether Western educational institutions of worldwide influence should allow themselves, wittingly or not, to be used as a platform by illiberal regimes through academics and scholars whom the regimes view as supporters of their views (and hence as, in effect, their proxies for propaganda). The well-reported cases of Cambridge University Press and China, or the LSE and the Ghaddafi regime, spring to mind. 
It is worth quoting the recent words of Ruth Barnett, a Jewish Kindertransport survivor in Britain: 
“‘Never Again’ is unlikely to be achieved in our lifetime but it is we who need to make an effective input towards making it happen. Each and every one of us can do something. It is essential to learn to contain our own violent impulses so that we can talk and negotiate instead of exacerbating and increasing the violence of others. 
“Perhaps the most poisonous factor is the toleration and cover-up of denial. Denial opens the door for others to commit crimes against humanity, as we clearly see others getting away with it. We need to enthuse and stimulate curiosity and an insistence to expose the truth. 
“We live with so much denial that many people can no longer distinguish between misinformation, disinformation and truth." 
(Ruth Barnett, 27 January 2018, "I Survived The Holocaust. Merely Remembering It Is No Longer Good Enough", RightsInfo.org, 
We sincerely urge OUP to reconsider your editorial decision to commission Dr Leider to write a reference article on the subject of the Rohingya. We ask that if this article goes ahead, it includes a clear disclaimer that Dr Leider is not a distant observer and that the article should be considered as an opinion piece, not as an unbiased reference source, regarding a controversial subject which has already been documented by MSF to have caused the deaths of over 6,700 Rohingya in the first month of Myanmar’s 2017 military attack and the flight of 680,000 refugees over several months. 
1. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, University Professor and a founding member of the Institute for Comparative Literature and Society, Columbia University, USA 
2. Nursyahbani Katjasungkana, National Coordinator of Indonesia Legal Aid Association for Women,        Indonesia 
3. Rainer Schulze, Professor Emeritus of Modern European History, University of Essex, and Founding Editor of the journal “The Holocaust in History and Memory,” UK 
4. Noam Chomsky, American linguist, philosopher and activist (Institute Professor, MIT), USA 
5. Mofidul Hoque, author and activist, Director, Center for the Study of Genocide and Justice, Liberation War Museum, Bangladesh 
6. Tapan Bose, filmmaker, human rights defender, India 
7. Richard Falk, Professor of International Law, Emeritus, Princeton University, USA 
8. Barbara Harrell-Bond, OBE Emerita Professor and Founding Director of The Refugee Studies Centre, University of Oxford 1982–1996, UK 
9. Barbara Harriss-White, Emeritus Professor of Development Studies, Oxford University, Emeritus Fellow of Wolfson College, Oxford, UK 
10. Ritu Dewan, Vice President, Indian Society of Labour Economics; Director Centre for Development Research and Action; Executive Director, Centre for Study of Society and Secularism; President, Indian Association for Women's Studies (2014-17) 
11. Prof. Gregory Stanton, Founding Chairman, Genocide Watch & George Mason University. Arlington, Virginia, USA 
12. Johan Galtung, Founder, Peace Studies 
13. Youk Chhang, Chairman, Genocide Documentation Center of Camboda/The Sleuk Rith Institute, Cambodia 
14. Abdul Malik Mujahid, Chair Emeritus Parliament of the World's Religions 
15. Karen Jungblut, Director of Global Initiatives, USC Shoah Foundation, USA 
16. María do Mar Castro Varela, Professor of Pedagogy and Social Work and activist, Alice Salomon University, Berlin, Germany 
17. C Abrar, Professor of International Relations, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh 
18. John H. Weiss, Associate Professor of History, Cornell University, USA 
19. Khin Mai Aung, Burmese American civil rights lawyer and writer, New York, USA 
20. Maung Zarni, Burmese human rights activist and scholar, Genocide Documentation Center of Cambodia/The Sleuk Rith Institute 
21. Harn Yawnghwe, Executive Director, Associates to Develop Democratic Burma Inc./Euro-Burma Office, Canada 
22. Bilal Raschid, Past President of Burmese Muslim Association 
23. Swagato Sarkar, DPhil (Oxford), Associate Professor, O.P. Jindal Global University, India 
24. Sumeet Mhaskar, DPhil (Oxford), O.P. Jindal Global University, India 
25. Prof. Donesh Mohan, Academic, India 
26. Dr. Peggy Mohan, Author, India 
27. Prof. Ranabir Samaddar, Academic, India 
28. Rita Manchanda, Feminist writer, India 
29. Samsul Islam, Author, India 
30. Neelima Sharma, Theatre activist, India 
31. Jawed Naqvi, journalist, India 
32. Seema Mustafa, journalist, India 
33. Ashok Agrwaal, lawyer, India 
34. Dr. Walid Salem, Al Quds University & the Director of The Centre for Democracy and Community Development, East Jerusalem, Palestine 
35. Jun Nishikawa, PhD, professor emeritus, Waseda University, Japan 
36. Dr Ravi P Bhatia, an educationist and peace researcher & Retired professor, Delhi University, India 
37. Gill H. boehringer, Honorary Senior Research Fellow, Macquarie University School of Law, Sydney , Australia 
38. Paul Copeland, C M, (Recipient, Order of Canada), Lawyer, Toronto, Canada 
39. U Kyaw Win, Professor Emeritus, Orange Coast College, California, USA 
40. Professor Michael W. Charney, Academic, UK 
41. Dr Amit Upadhyay, Assistant professor, TISS Hyderabad, India 
42. Dr. Nicola Suyin Pocock, United Nations University International Institute of Global Health, Malaysia 
43. Rezaur Rahman Lenin,Academic Activist, Adjuct Faculty, Eastern University Bangladesh & Executive Director, Law Life Culture, Bangladesh 
44. Natalie Brinham, ESRC PhD scholar, Queen Mary University of London School of Law, UK 
45. Niranjan Sahoo, PhD, Senior Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, India 
46. Prof. Dr. Célestin Tagou, Prof. of PS, IR P&D Studies, Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and International Relations, Protestant University of Central Africa, Executive Secretariat of the Network of Protestant Universities of Africa
47. Dr. Tilman Evers, Germany 
48. Jørgen Johansen, Deputy Editor of Journal of Resistance Studies, Sweden 
49. Sarah Tobias, philanthropist & activist, Canada 
50. Miki Lanza, Movimento Nonviolento c/o Centro Studi Sereno Regis, Torino, Italy 
51. Oskar Butcher, human rights activist and scholar, Germany 
52. Professor Emeritus George Kent, University of Hawai'i and Deputy Editor, World Nutrition, USA 
53. Sebastian Eck, Galtung-Institut, Switzerland 
54. Robert J. Burrowes Ph.D., co-founder 'The People's Charter to Create a Nonviolent World', Australia 
55. Shadi Sadr, Executive Director of Justice for Iran, UK 
56. Tasnim Nazeer, Award-winning journalist and Universal Peace Federation Ambassador for Peace, UK 
57. Emir Ramic, Academic, Ph.D., Chairman of the Institute for Research of Genocide, Canada 
58. Nadeem Haque, P.Eng. - Director of the Institute of Higher Reasoning (IHR), Canada 
59. Diana de la Rúa Eugenio, President of Asociación Respuesta para la Paz -ARP-, member NGO of      OAS, President of International Peace Research Association Foundation -IPRA Foundation, Argentina 
60. Dr. Syeda Hamid, Academic and Author, India 
61. Dr. Siddiq Wahid, Historian and Educationist, India 
62. Dr. Syed Ahmed Haroon, Psychiatrist, Pakistan 
63. Anis Haroon, Poet, Pakistan 
64. Sushil Pyakurel, Adviser to President of Nepal 
65. Porf. Noor Ahmad Baba, Academic, India 
66. Anand Patwardhan, Filmmaker, India 
67. Rodolphe Prom, President, Destination Justice, Cambodia 
68. Doreen Chen, Co-Director, Destination Justice, Cambodia 
69. Syed Zainul Abedin, Painter, Poet, Journalist, Bangladesh 
70. Dr. Navsharan Singh, Researcher and author, India 
71. Leo fernandez, IT Specialist, India 
72. Feroz Medhi, Filmmaker social activist, Canada 
73. John Packer, Associate Professor of Law and Director, Human Rights Research and Education Centre, University of Ottawa, Canada 
74. Fathima, MA Women's Studies Student, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, India 
75. Rana Jawad, University of Bath, UK 
76. Prof. Dr. Sami A. Al-Arian Director and Public Affairs Professor, Center for Islam and Global Affairs İslam ve Küresel İlişkiler Merkezi, Turkey 
77. Penny Green, Professor of Law and Globalisation and Director of the International State Crime Initiative, Queen Mary University of London, UK 
78. Karen Busby, Professor of Law & Director, Centre for Human Rights Research, University of Manitoba 
79. Lyal S. Sunga, Visiting Professor in International Relations and Global Politics, The American University of Rome, Italy 
80. Dr. Christina Szurlej, Assistant Professor, St. Thomas University (Canada) 
81. Matthew Smith, Chief Executive Officer, Fortify Rights
x












































































































Share:

ေဒါက္တာဂ်က္လုိက္ဒါ၏ အာရွသမုိင္းစာအတြဲစဥ္ အေပၚ စုိးရိမ္မကင္း ျဖစ္မိေၾကာင္း ေအာက္စဖုိ႔ဒ္ တကၠသုိလ္သုိ႔ ေပးစာ


ေဒါက္တာဂ်က္လုိက္ဒါႏွင့္ ေအာက္စဖုိ႔ဒ္တကၠသုိလ္ စာပုံႏွိပ္ထုတ္ေ၀ေရး (OUP) ၏ အာရွသမုိင္းစာ အတြဲစဥ္ အေပၚ စုိးရိမ္မကင္း ျဖစ္မိေၾကာင္း ေအာက္စဖုိ႔ဒ္တကၠသုိလ္စာပုံႏွိပ္ထုတ္ေ၀ေရးသုိ႔ ေပးစာ။
ေဖေဖာ္၀ါရီလ (၅) ရက္၊ ၂၀၁၈
OUP စြယ္စုံက်မ္း သုေတသန၏ အာရွသမုိင္းစာ အတြဲစဥ္မွ လာမည့္အတြဲျဖစ္ေသာ The ORE of Asia History တြင္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးစုမ်ားအေၾကာင္း အညႊန္းေဆာင္းပါးကုိ ျပဳစုရန္ ေဒါက္တာ ဂ်က္လုိက္ဒါအား တာ၀န္ေပးအပ္ေၾကာင္း ၾကားသိရသည့္အတြက္ ေအာက္ပါလက္မွတ္ထုိးထားေသာ တတ္သိပညာရွင္မ်ား၊ လူ႕အခြင့္အေရးအတြက္ စည္းရုံးလႈံ႕ေဆာ္သူမ်ားပါဝင္သည့္ ကၽြနု္ပ္တုိ႔ ပညာရွင္မ်ားအုပ္စုမွ အထူးပင္ စိတ္အေနွာက္အယွက္ျဖစ္ရပါသည္။ ေဒါက္တာ ဂ်က္လုိက္ဒါသည္ ဘန္ေကာက္အေျခစုိက္ Ecole Francaise de l' Extreme-Orient (EFEO) အဖြဲ႕ေခါင္းေဆာင္ျဖစ္ၿပီး ေနျပည္ေတာ္ရွိ ျမန္မာ့တပ္မေတာ္ စစ္သမုိင္းျပတုိက္၏ ထင္ရွားေသာ အႀကံေပးတဦးျဖစ္သည္။ (လင့္ခ္ကို ရႈ - http://asianhistory.oxfordre.com/page/forthcoming/).
လူႀကီးမင္းတုိ႔ သိၿပီးျဖစ္သည့္အတုိင္းပင္ တပ္မေတာ္ဟု သိၾကသည့္ ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္သည္ အျပည္ျပည္ဆုိင္ရာ ဥပေဒမ်ားေအာက္ရွိ ရာဇဝတ္မႈမ်ားကို က်ဴးလြန္ေနေၾကာင္း ယုံၾကည္ေလာက္ဖြယ္ စြပ္စြဲခံေနရျခင္း ျဖစ္သည္။ ထုိရာဇဝတ္မႈမ်ားတြင္ လူသားမ်ဳိးႏြယ္အေပၚ က်ဴးလြန္ေသာရာဇဝတ္မႈမ်ားအျပင္ ရာဇဝတ္မႈအေပါင္းတုိ႔၏ သနင္းဟုပင္ဆုိအပ္ေသာ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ဳိးစုမ်ားအေပၚ လူမ်ဳိးတုန္းသတ္ျဖတ္မႈ (ဂ်ီႏုိဆုိက္) ပင္ ပါဝင္သည္။
လူႀကီးမင္းတုိ႔ သိၿပီးျဖစ္သည့္အတုိင္း ေအာက္စဖုိ႔ဒ္တကၠသုိလ္စာပုံႏွိပ္ထုတ္ေဝေရးသည္ ၎တုိ႔ ထုတ္ေဝသမ်ွ အညႊန္းစာတမ္းမ်ားႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္ေသာနယ္ပယ္မ်ားတြင္ မွ်တမႈႏွင့္ ယုံၾကည္ထုိက္သည့္ ၾသဇာတကၠိရွိေၾကာင္း ဂုဏ္သတင္းအရွိန္အေစာ္ရွိသည္။ OUP online မွထုတ္ေဝလုိက္ေသာ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာႏွင့္ပတ္သက္သမွ်ကုိ ပညာရွင္အသုိင္းအဝုိင္းကေရာ၊ သာမန္ျပည္သူလူထုကပါ အထူးအလည္ ယုံၾကည္ကုိးစားစရာအျဖစ္ မွတ္ယူၾကေပလိမ့္မည္။ ထုိ႔ျပင္ ကမၻာေပၚတြင္ အႀကီးမ်ားဆုံး ႏုိင္ငံမဲ့ဦးေရျဖစ္ေနသည့္ လူမ်ဳိးစုႀကီးတခုအေပၚ က်ဴးလြန္ေနေသာ ရာဇဝတ္မႈအမ်ဳိးအမည္ကုိ နာမည္သတ္မွတ္ရန္ လက္ရွိျဖစ္ပြားေနေသာ အျငင္းပြားမႈတြင္ ႀကီးမားေသာ အက်ဳိးသက္ေရာက္မႈကို ျဖစ္ေပၚေစလိမ့္မည္။ ထုိလူမ်ဳိးစု၏ လူမ်ဳိးစုကုိယ္ပုိင္ဝိေသသလကၡဏာႏွင့္ သမုိင္းေၾကာင္းဆုိင္ရာတည္ရွိ္မႈကုိ ျမန္မာျပည္တြင္ တရားဝင္အရလည္းေကာင္း၊ လူႀကိဳက္မ်ားသည့္နည္းလမ္းျဖင့္လည္းေကာင္း ေဖ်ာက္ဖ်က္ေနျခင္းကုိ ခံေနရသည္။
သုိ႔ျဖစ္၍ ေအာက္စဖုိ႔ဒ္ စြယ္စုံက်မ္းသုေတသန၏ အာရွသမုိင္းအတြက္ အညႊန္းေဆာင္းပါးအတြက္ ေဒါက္တာ ဂ်က္လုိက္ဒါကုိ ေရြးခ်ယ္မႈအေပၚ အခ်က္အလက္ေျမာက္မ်ားစြာအေပၚအေျခခံလ်က္ ကၽြနု္ပ္တုိ႔၏ စုိးရိမ္ပူပန္မႈကုိ လူႀကီးမင္းတုိ႔ အာရုံစုိက္မိေစရန္ တင္ျပအပ္ပါသည္။
(၁) ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားႏွင့္ျဖစ္ေစ၊ သူတုိ႔၏သမုိင္းေၾကာင္းႏွင့္ျဖစ္ေစ ပတ္သက္၍ စာနယ္ဇင္းႏွင့္ အင္တာဗ်ဴးမ်ား၊ ေဟာေျပာပြဲမ်ား၊ ေရးသားထုတ္ေဝေသာ ေဆာင္းပါးမ်ားတြင္ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါ ဆြဲကုိင္ထားသည့္ ရပ္တည္ခ်က္မ်ားသည္ သူ၏ ဦးတည္ခ်က္အေပၚ အေလးအနက္ ေမးခြန္းထုတ္စရာမ်ား ရွိေနေၾကာင္း ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ ေတြ႔ရွိရသည္။ ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္မွ ညႊန္ၾကားသည့္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာလူ႔အဖြဲ႕အစည္းအေပၚ အၾကမ္းဖက္မႈမ်ား ႏွင့္ ေျမလွန္မီးရႈိ႔စစ္ဆင္ေရးမ်ားကုိ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါ၏ စနစ္တက်မွတ္တမ္းတင္ထားေသာ ျငင္းဆန္မႈပုံစံမ်ားမွာ ႀကီးထြားလာေနေသာ တရားဥပေဒေၾကာင္းဆုိင္ရာ ခြဲျခမ္းစိတ္ျဖာမႈမ်ားႏွင့္ လူ႕အခြင့္အေရးဆုိင္ရာ သုေတသနအစီရင္ခံမ်ား၏ စိန္ေခၚျခင္းကုိ ခံေနရသည္။ ျမန္မာအစိုးရမွ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားကုိ အုပ္စုတခုအျဖစ္သတ္မွတ္ကာ ခြဲျခားစီရင္ ဖိႏွိပ္ေနမႈသည္ လူသားမ်ဳိးႏြယ္အေပၚက်ဴးလြန္ေသာ ရာဇဝတ္မွႈႏွင့္ လူမ်ဳိးတုန္းသတ္ျဖတ္မႈတည္းဟူေသာ အျပည္ျပည္ဆုိင္ရာ ရာဇဝတ္မႈအဆင့္အထိပင္ ေရာက္ရွိေနေၾကာင္း အဆုိပါ အစီရင္ခံစာမ်ားက ညႊန္းျပေနသည္။
(၂) ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေပၚ ခ်မွတ္ထားေသာ မူဝါဒမ်ားကုိ ခြင့္လႊတ္လက္ခံထားသည့္ စစ္တပ္နွင့္ အစိုးရအရာရွိမ်ားအတူ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါကုိ ရုပ္ျမင္သံၾကားေပၚတြင္ အတူယွဥ္တြဲ၍ ျမင္ရျခင္းမ်ားသည္ ၾကည့္ရႈေနေသာ ပရိတ္သတ္အား ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာ ေျခာက္သိန္းခြဲကုိ ေမာင္းထုတ္ခဲ့ရသည့္ အေၾကာင္းတရားမ်ားသည္ ခုိင္လုံပါသည္ဟူ၍လည္းေကာင္း၊ စစ္တပ္က ဝန္ခံထားေသာ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာအစုလုိက္အၿပံဳလုိက္ သတ္ျဖတ္မႈမ်ားကုိ ျဖစ္ေပၚေစသည့္ အေၾကာင္းတရားမ်ားသည္ ခုိင္လုံပါသည္ဟူ၍လည္းေကာင္း ထပ္ေလာင္းအတည္ျပဳေပးေနသည့္အသြင္ ေဆာင္ေနပါသည္။ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေပၚက်ဴးလြန္မႈကုိ ကုလသမဂၢက လူမ်ဳိးတုန္းအေပ်ာက္ရွင္းလင္းသတ္ျဖတ္မႈ (ethnic cleansing) ဟု ေဖာ္ျပသည္။ ထုိက်ဴးလြန္မႈစတင္ၿပီး တလအၾကာတြင္ ျမန္မာကာကြယ္ေရးဝန္ႀကီးဌာန၏ ဝါဒျဖန္႔လက္တံတခုျဖစ္ေသာ ျမဝတီသတင္းအုပ္စုက "ရခုိင္အေရး ေဆြးေႏြးအေျဖရွာ" ဆုိသည့္ စကားဝိုင္းတခု ႀကီးမွဴးျပဳလုပ္ခဲ့သည္။ အဆုိပါစကားဝုိင္းတြင္ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါ တဦးတည္းသာ ႏုိင္ငံျခားသားပညာရွင္ျဖစ္ေနျခင္း ဓါတ္ပုံမ်ား၊ စာအေထာက္အထားသက္ေသသည္ အထက္တြင္ဆုိခဲ့ေသာ ေမးခြန္းထုတ္ဖြယ္ရာမ်ားကုိ မီးေမာင္းထုိးျပေနပါသည္။ ၂၀၁၇ ခုႏွစ္၊ စက္တင္ဘာလ ၇ ရက္ ႏွင့္ ၈ ရက္ေန႔မ်ားတြင္ ေနျပည္ေတာ္၌ က်င္းပသည့္ ဖိတ္ၾကားခံရသူမ်ားသာစာတန္းပါ အထက္တြင္ဆုိခဲ့ေသာ ရခုိင္အေရးေဆြးေႏြးပြဲတြင္ ေဒါက္တာ ဂ်က္လုိက္ဒါကုိ သန္းေအး နွင့္ ကုိကုိလႈိင္အမည္ရွိ အျငိမ္းစား ဒု-ဗုိလ္မွဴးႀကီးႏွစ္ဦးႏွင့္အတူ စင္ျမင့္ေပၚတြင္ ထုိင္လ်က္သား ေတြ႔ျမင္ခဲ့ၾကရသည္။ (သန္းေအးမွာ စစ္ဗ်ဴဟာဆုိင္ရာတပ္ဖြဲ႔အႀကီးအကဲေဟာင္းျဖစ္ၿပီး ကိုကုိလႈိင္မွာ ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေဟာင္းႏွင့္သမၼတေဟာင္းသိန္းစိန္ (၂၀၁၀ - ၂၀၁၅)၏ အႀကံေပး ျဖစ္သည္။)

ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေပၚတြင္ အေရးယူျပဳမူခဲ့ျခင္းအေပၚ ၁၉၉၄ ခုႏွစ္မွ စ၍ ကုလသမဂၢအထူးကုိယ္စားလွယ္ ၆ ဆက္တုိင္တုိင္ကလည္းေကာင္း၊ AI ကဲ့သုိ႕ေသာ လူ႕အခြင့္အေရးဆုိင္ရာ ကမၻာ့ဦးေဆာင္ေစာင့္ၾကည့္ေလ့လာေရးအဖြဲ႕မ်ားကလည္းေကာင္း ျပင္းထန္ေသာလူ႕အခြင့္အေရးခ်ဳိးေဖာက္မႈမ်ားအျဖစ္ သတ္မွတ္ထားခဲ့ၾကသည္။ အထက္တြင္ ဆုိခဲ့ေသာ စာအုပ္ကုိ မိတ္ဆက္ရာတြင္ ျမန္မာအစုိးရ၏ ရပ္တည္ခ်က္မွာ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေပၚ ျပဳမူေဆာင္ရြက္မႈမ်ားကုိ တရားဝင္ေသာေဆာင္ရြက္မႈမ်ားအျဖစ္ ေဖာ္ျပထားသည္။ ဤသည္မွာ အစၥလာမ္ဘာသာ၏ နယ္ေျမအင္အားခ်ဲ႕ထြင္လုိမႈ၊ ကမၻာကုိ ႀကီးစုိးရန္ႀကိဳးပမ္းမႈမွ ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္က တုိင္းျပည္ကုိ ကာကြယ္ရန္ဟူေသာ အေၾကာင္းျပခ်က္ျဖစ္သည္။ ( စာမ်က္ႏွာ ၄ - "ရခုိင္အေရးစကားဝုိင္း" ကာကြယ္ေရးဝန္ႀကီးဌာန၊ ျမဝတီသတင္းအုပ္စု)
အဆုိပါ ဗ်ဴဟာေျမာက္ေဆြးေႏြးပြဲမ်ားတြင္ ဒု-ဗုိလ္မွဴးႀကီး (ၿငိမ္း) ကုိကုိလႈိင္က ေအာက္စဖုိ႔ဒ္ တကၠသိုလ္ကုိ အထူးၾသဇာတိကၠမရွိေသာဌာနႀကီးအျဖစ္ ေရြးခ်ယ္ထုတ္ႏႈတ္တင္ျပသြားသည္။ ေအာက္စဖုိ႔ဒ္တကၠသုိလ္သည္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာသမုိင္းေၾကာင္း၊ ကုိယ္ပုိင္အမွတ္အသားႏွင့္ ကုိယ္စားျပဳမႈ စသည့္ ဗဟုသုတမ်ားကုိ ေဆြးေႏြးရန္၊ ျဖန္႔က်က္ရန္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားႏွင့္ပတ္သက္ေသာ အျပည္ျပည္ဆုိင္ရာ ကြန္ဖရင့္တခုကို လက္ခံက်င္းပဖူးသည္။ ဤနည္းျဖင့္ သူသည္ ေအာက္စဖုိ႔ဒ္တကၠသုိလ္နွင့္အျခားၾသဇာရွိသည္ဌာနမ်ားကုိ ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္၏ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာအမွတ္အသားႏွင့္သမုိင္းကုိ သမုိင္းေၾကာင္း တရားဝင္ျငင္းဆုိရာ၊ ႏုိင္ငံေတာ္က ညႊန္ၾကားသည့္အၾကမ္းဖက္မႈႏွင့္ေမာင္းထုတ္မႈမ်ားကုိ ျငင္းဆုိရာတုိ႔အတြက္ အသုံးခ်စရာ မဟာဗ်ဴဟာက်သည့္ ေနရာဌာနမ်ားသဖြယ္ အဓိပၸါယ္ေဖာ္ေဆာင္ ေျပာၾကားသြားသည္။
တက္ေရာက္သူအမ်ားစုမွာ ကာကြယ္ေရးဝန္ႀကီးဌာနမွ အရာရွိမ်ားသာျဖစ္သည္။ ျမန္မာျပည္မွ မြတ္ဆလင္ဘာသာဝင္အမ်ားစုမွာလည္း ေခတ္ေဟာင္းဥေရာပမွ ဂ်ဴးမ်ားကဲ့သုိ႔ပင္ လက္ညဳိးထုိးအျပစ္ပုံခ် ခံေနၾကရသည္။ ျမန္မာအစုိးရသေဘာထားႏွင့္ လူအမ်ားအၾကားေရပန္းစားေသာ "မြတ္စလင္ရြံရွာေၾကာက္ရြံ႕မုန္းတီးျခင္း" ကုိ ပညာရပ္ဆုိင္ရာႏွင့္ လူ႕အခြင့္အေရးစာတမ္းမ်ားတြင္ ေကာင္းစြာ မွတ္တမ္းတင္ထားၿပီး ျဖစ္သည္။ ဤေဆြးေႏြးပြဲမ်ားကုိ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါ၏ အိမ္ရွင္အဖြဲ႕အစည္းျဖစ္ေသာ ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္မွ ရခုိင္ေျမာက္ပုိင္းတြင္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ဳိးအေျမာက္အျမားအတြက္ တာဝန္မကင္းျဖစ္ေနခ်ိန္တြင္ က်င္းပခဲ့ျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။ ေလွ်ာ့ေလွ်ာ့ေပါ႔ေပါ႔ ခန္႔မွန္းမႈမ်ားအရ ငါးႏွစ္ေအာက္ ကေလးသူငယ္ ၇၃၀ အပါအဝင္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာအနည္းဆုံး ၆၇၀၀ ခန္႔ စစ္ဆင္ေရးစတင္ေသာ ပထမလအတြင္း (၂၀၁၇ ၾသဂုတ္ ၂၅ ရက္မွ စက္တင္ဘာ ၂၄ ရက္အထိ) သတ္ျဖတ္ခံခဲ့ရသည္။ ဤသည္မွာ ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ရွ္ႏုိင္ငံ စစ္တေကာင္းရွိ ဒုကၡသည္စခန္းမ်ားတြင္ ေရာက္ရွိေနေသာ အသက္ရွင္က်န္ရစ္သူမ်ားကုိ MSF အဖြဲ႔မွ အကန္႔အသတ္နွင့္သာ ျပဳလုပ္ႏုိင္ခဲ့ေသာ ေလ့လာေတြ႕ရွိခ်က္မ်ားအရျဖစ္သည္။ (Source: “Myanmar/Bangladesh: MSF surveys estimate that at least 6,700 Rohingya were killed during the attacks in Myanmar” http://www.msf.org/…/myanmarbangladesh-msf-surveys-estimate… )
(၃) ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ား၏ ကုိယ္ပုိင္အမွတ္အသားကုိ ေဝဖန္စိစစ္ရာတြင္ ႏုိင္ငံေရးႏွင့္လူမ်ဳိးစုပဋိပကၡေၾကာင့္ေပၚေပါက္လာေသာ ႏုိင္ငံေရးကုိယ္ပုိင္အမွတ္အသားအျဖစ္ သေဘာထားရန္ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါမွ အခုိင္အမာေျပာဆုိေနခဲ့သည္။ (ဤလင့္ခ္မ်ားတြင္ ရႈ။ “History Behind Rakhine State Conflict” https://www.irrawaddy.com/…/history-behind-rakhine-state-co…, “The Frictions in the Rakhine State Are Less About Islamophobia Than Rohingya-Phobia” https://thewire.in/…/frictions-rakhine-state-less-islamoph…/ , and “The Truth About Myanmar’s Rohingya Issue” https://thediplomat.com/…/the-truth-about-myanmars-rohingy…/ ) ဤသည္မွာ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာတုိ႔၏ ေျပာၾကားခ်က္ျဖစ္ေသာ ရခုိင္ျပည္တြင္ႏွစ္ရွည္လမ်ား မွတ္တမ္္းမွတ္ရာသမုိင္းေၾကာင္းႏွင့္တကြ အေျခခ်ေနထုိင္လာခဲ့သည္ဆုိသည့္ အခ်က္ကုိ ဆန္႔က်င္ကာ တဖက္သတ္ဘက္လုိက္ေသာ သူ၏ ရပ္တည္ခ်က္ကုိ ေဖာ္ျပသည္။ ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္ႏွင့္သူ႔အၾကား သိသာထင္ရွားေသာ ပတ္သက္မႈမ်ားအျပင္ ဤသုိ႔ သိသာထင္ရွားသည့္ ဘက္လုိက္မႈမ်ားေၾကာင့္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေၾကာင္း အညႊန္းေဆာင္းပါး ေရးသားရန္ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါ၏ သင့္ေလ်ာ္မႈအေပၚ သံသယမ်ားျဖစ္ေပၚေစသည္။ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါ၏ ေရးသားခ်က္မ်ားႏွင့္ လူသိရွင္ၾကားထုတ္ျပန္ခ်က္မ်ားသည္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားကုိ ဆန္႔က်င္သည့္ ဖုံးကြယ္မထားေသာ တဖက္သတ္ဘက္လုိက္မႈအျဖစ္ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ ရႈျမင္သည္။ ထုိတဖက္သတ္ဘက္လုိက္မႈေၾကာင့္ပင္ ျငင္းဆုိရန္ဘယ္နည္းႏွင့္မွ် မျဖစ္ႏုိင္ေသာ၊ အလြယ္တကူ လက္လွမ္းမီႏုိင္ေသာ သက္ေသအေထာက္အထားမ်ားကုိ ျငင္းပယ္ျခင္း၊ တမင္ဥေပကၡာျပဳျခင္းမ်ား သူ႔တြင္ ျဖစ္ေပၚလာရသည္။ အမွန္တြင္ ထုိသက္ေသအေထာက္အထားမ်ားသည္ သူက်မ္းျပဳစုခဲ့သည့္ "ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားသည္ အျခား တုိင္းရင္းသားအစစ္အမွန္မ်ား၏ ကုိယ္ပုိင္အမွတ္အသားမ်ားႏွင့္မတူဘဲ ၁၉၅၀ ခုႏွစ္ လြတ္လပ္ေရးရၿပီးေနာက္ပုိင္း မြတ္စလင္တုိက္ခုိက္ေရးသမားမ်ား (သုိ႔မဟုတ္) မူဂ်ာဟစ္ဒင္မ်ားက ဖန္တီးထုတ္လုပ္လုိက္ေသာ အေခၚအေဝၚတခုမွ်သာျဖစ္သည္" ဟူသည့္အဆုိကုိ ေခ်ဖ်က္ႏုိင္ေသာ သက္သက္မ်ားသာ ျဖစ္သည္။ ဥပမာအားျဖင့္… "၁၉၆၁ ခုႏွစ္ ဇူလုိင္လတြင္ မူဂ်ာဟစ္ဒင္ ခြဲထြက္ေရးသမားမ်ား လက္နက္ခ်ၿပီးေနာက္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုအစုိးရက ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားကုိ ဖြဲ႕စည္းပုံပါ ျပည္ေထာင္စုတုိင္းရင္းသားအုပ္စုတခုအျဖစ္ အသိအမွတ္ျပဳခဲ့သည္" ဆုိသည္ကုိ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါက ထင္ေယာင္ထင္မွားျဖစ္မႈအျဖစ္ တံဆိပ္ကပ္ခဲ့သည္။ အမွန္တကယ္ ျငင္းဆုိ၍ မရေသာအခ်က္တခုမွာ… ၁၉၆၄ ခုႏွစ္အထိ ျမန္မာအစုိးရ၏ ျမန္မာဘာသာျဖင့္ တရားဝင္ထုတ္ေဝေသာ ျမန္မာ့စြယ္စုံက်မ္း အတြဲ -၉ တြင္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာကုိ တုိင္းရင္းသား လူမ်ဳိးစုတခုအျဖစ္ ထည့္သြင္းထားခဲ့ျခင္းပင္ ျဖစ္သည္။ ထုိ႔ျပင္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံ၏ တခုတည္းေသာ အသံလႊင့္ဌာနျဖစ္သည့္ ျမန္မာ့အသံမွ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာဘာသာစကားကုိ တုိင္းရင္းသားဘာသာစကားတခုအျဖစ္ အျခားတုိင္းရင္းသားအစီအစဥ္မ်ားျဖစ္ေသာ ရွမ္း၊ လားဟူ စသည္တုိ႔ႏွင့္အတူ တပတ္လွ်င္ သုံးႀကိမ္ထုတ္လႊင့္ခဲ့သည္။ ဤသည္မွာ ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေနဝင္း၏ စစ္အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ေရး သုံးႏွစ္ေျမာက္သည့္ ၁၉၆၄ ခုႏွစ္အထိျဖစ္သည္။
အလြယ္တကူ လက္လွမ္းမီႏုိင္ေသာ တရားဝင္မွတ္တမ္းမွတ္ရာမ်ားက ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ဳိးမ်ားသည္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံေတာ္၏ တုိင္းရင္းသားအုပ္စုတခုအျဖစ္ တရားဝင္အသိအမွတ္ျပဳခံခဲ့ရသည္ ဆုိသည့္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ား၏ စုေပါင္းအဆုိကုိ ေထာက္ခံလ်က္ရွိသည္။ ဤအခ်က္မ်ားအေပၚေထာက္ရႈလ်က္ ေအာက္ပါအတုိင္း ေကာက္ခ်က္ဆြဲႏုိင္သည္။ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာတုိ႔၏ တုိင္းရင္းသားကုိယ္ပုိင္အမွတ္အသား၊ သမုိင္းေၾကာင္းႏွင့္ ၁၉၄၈ ခုႏွစ္ လြတ္လပ္ေရးမတုိင္မီကပင္ ရွိခဲ့ေသာ ယင္းတုိ႔၏ တည္ရွိမႈကုိ ျမန္မာအစုိးရက စီမံကိန္းခ်ၿပီး ေဖ်ာက္ဖ်က္ရန္ႀကိဳးပမ္းခဲ့သည္ဟူေသာ ေကာက္ခ်က္ပင္ျဖစ္သည္။ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ား၏ ကုိယ္ပုိင္အမွတ္အသား ႏွင့္ ႏုိင္ငံသားျဖစ္မႈ အေထာက္အထားမ်ား၊ အေထာက္အထားရင္းျမစ္မ်ားကုိ ဥေပကၡာျပဳရန္ ေဒါက္တာလိုက္ဒါ၏ ေရြးခ်ယ္မႈသည္ "ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားသည္ တုိင္းရင္းသားလည္းမဟုတ္၊ ႏုိင္ငံသားလည္းမဟုတ္" ဟူသည့္ ျမန္မာတုိ႔၏ ဝါဒမႈိင္းကုိ ကူညီပံ့ပုိးေပးေနသလုိ ျဖစ္ေနသည္။ တခ်ိန္တည္းတြင္ ပညာရပ္ဆုိင္ရာ လုပ္ပုိင္ခြင့္ေအာက္တြင္ အမွန္တရားကုိ ဖုံးကြယ္ရန္ အေထာက္အကူေပးသလုိ ျဖစ္ေနသည္။
နာဇီအုပ္ခ်ဳပ္မႈေအာက္တြင္ ဂ်ဳးမ်ားကုိ ဂ်ာမန္မ်ားက ႏုိင္ငံသားအျဖစ္မွ ပယ္ဖ်က္မႈမ်ားႏွင့္ ျမန္မာျပည္မွ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေပၚ ႏုိင္ငံသားအျဖစ္မွ ပယ္ဖ်က္မႈ၊ ကုိယ္ပုိင္အမွတ္အသား ဖ်က္ဆီးမႈမ်ားအၾကား ထိတ္လန္႔စဖြယ္ တူညီမႈမ်ား ရွိေနသည္ကုိ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ ေလ့လာေတြ႕ရွိရသည္။
(၄) ဂ်ာမဏီကဲ့သုိ႔ေသာ ႏုိင္ငံမ်ားတြင္ လူမ်ဳိးတုန္းသတ္ျဖတ္မႈမရွိေၾကာင္း ျငင္းဆန္မႈသည္ ရာဇဝတ္မႈေျမာက္သည္။ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအား လူမ်ဳိးတုန္းသတ္ျဖတ္မႈအပါအဝင္ ႏုိင္ငံေတာ္မွ ဦးေဆာင္ျပဳလုပ္သည့္ လူသားမ်ဳိးႏြယ္အေပၚ က်ဴးလြန္ေသာရာဇဝတ္မႈမရွိဟု ျငင္းဆန္ျခင္းသည္လည္း ရာဇဝတ္မႈ ေျမာက္မေျမာက္ စီရင္ ဆုံးျဖတ္ႏုိင္ေသာ ဥပေဒမ်ဳိးကို ယူေကတြင္လည္းေကာင္း ႏုိင္ငံတကာတြင္လည္းေကာင္း မရွိေသးေသာ္ျငား လည္း ယခုအခါ ကမၻာ့ဦးေဆာင္အဖြဲ႕အစည္းႀကီးမ်ားအၾကားတြင္လည္းေကာင္း၊ လူမ်ဳိးတုန္းသတ္ျဖတ္မႈဆုိင္ရာ နယ္ပယ္မွ ပညာရွင္မ်ားအၾကား ဘုံသေဘာတူညီမႈ ေပၚထြက္လာေနၿပီ ျဖစ္သည္။ ဤဘုံသေဘာတူညီခ်က္မွာ လူမ်ဳိးတုန္းသတ္ျဖတ္မႈအတြက္ ျမန္မာအစုိးရတြင္ တာဝန္ရွိသည္ဟူေသာ သေဘာတူညီခ်က္ပင္ျဖစ္သည္။ ထုိအထင္ကရ ကမၻာ့ဦးေဆာင္အဖြဲ႕အစည္းႀကီးမ်ားမွာ The US Holocaust Memorial Museum and Yale University Human Rights Law Clinic, the University of Washington Law School, the Queen Mary University of London International State Crimes Initiative, the Russell-Sartre tribunal, the Permanent People’s Tribunal on Myanmar တုိ႔ ျဖစ္ၾကသည္။ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေပၚတြင္ လူမ်ဳိးတုန္းသတ္ျဖတ္မႈက်ဴးလြန္ခဲ့သည္ဆုိေသာအခ်က္ကုိ ယတိျပတ္ပယ္ခ်ရန္ မျဖစ္ႏုိင္ေသးေၾကာင္း ကုလသမဂၢ လူ႕အခြင့္အေရးဆုိင္ရာ မဟာမင္းႀကီးကပင္ ရွင္းရွင္းလင္းလင္း ေဖာ္ျပခဲ့ၿပီး ျဖစ္သည္။

ဤသုိ႔ေသာ ကမၻာေက်ာ္သုေတသနအဖြဲ႔ႀကီးမ်ားႏွင့္ သက္ဆုိင္ရာ ကၽြမ္းက်င္ပညာရွင္မ်ား၏ လူသိရွင္ၾကား ထုတ္ျပန္ထားခဲ့ေသာ ေတြ႕ရွိခ်က္မ်ားကုိ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါမွ ပယ္ခ်ခဲ့သည္။ ျမန္မာျပည္တြင္းရွိ လူမ်ားစုဗုဒၶဘာသာဝင္မ်ား၏ လူမ်ဳိးေရးခြဲျခားမႈသည္ အၾကမ္းဖက္သည့္အဆင့္သုိ႔ ေရာက္ရွိေနေၾကာင္း ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါက အသိအမွတ္ျပဳရန္ ပ်က္ကြက္ခဲ့သည္။ ျမန္မာတုိ႔၏ လူမ်ဳိးေရးခြဲျခားမႈကုိ "ျပင္းျပေသာ စိတ္ခံစားမႈ" အျဖစ္မွ်သာ သူက ကင္ပြန္းတပ္ခဲ့သည္။
ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာအေၾကာင္းႏွင့္ပတ္သက္၍ျဖစ္ေစ၊ မည္သည့္အေၾကာင္းအရာေပၚတြင္ျဖစ္ေစ မွတ္ခ်က္ေပးႏုိင္ေသာအခြင့္အေရးသည္ အျခားသူမ်ားမွာကဲ့သုိ႔ပင္ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါတြင္လည္း အခြင့္အေရးရွိသည္ကုိ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ မျငင္းလုိပါ။ သုိ႔ရာတြင္ လူမ်ဳိးစုတခု၏ တုိင္းရင္းသားေရးရာ၊ ကို္ယ္ပုိင္အမွတ္အသားႏွင့္ဆုိင္ေသာ အဆုိျပဳခ်က္မ်ားအေပၚတြင္ တစုံတေယာက္က ျပင္းျပင္းထန္ထန္ ဆန္႔က်င္ေနၿပီဆုိပါက ထုိလူမ်ဳိးစုအေၾကာင္းကုိ တရားမွ်တစြာႏွင့္ဘက္မလုိက္ဘဲ အညႊန္းေဆာင္းပါးေရးရန္ ထုိသူအားတာဝန္ေပးမႈသည္ မမွ်တသည့္ အသြင္ေဆာင္ေနပါသည္။ ထုိသုိ႔ ဘက္လုိက္ေသာအျမင္မ်ားကုိ ထုတ္ေဝရန္ ORE သည္ သင့္ေလ်ာ္ေသာ လမ္းေၾကာင္းမဟုတ္ပါ။ OUP အေနႏွင့္လည္း မပတ္သက္သင့္ပါ။
OUP သည္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေၾကာင္းကုိသာ ေဆာင္းပါးေရးသားရန္ ေကာ္မရွင္ေပးသည့္ဟန္ ရွိေနသည္ကုိလည္း ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ သတိျပဳမိပါသည္။ ရခုိင္ဗုဒၶဘာသာအဖြဲ႔အစည္းအေၾကာင္းကုိမူကား ေရးသားရန္ေကာ္မရွင္ေပးဟန္မတူ။ စင္စစ္တြင္ကား ရခုိင္တုိ႔၏ တုိင္းရင္းသားျဖစ္မႈအဆုိမ်ားသည္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ား၏ အဆုိထက္ ပုိမုိခုိင္မာမႈရွိသည္ဟု ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ မထင္ပါ။ ထုိ႔ေၾကာင့္ OUP သည္ မမွန္းဆႏုိင္ေသာ အေၾကာင္းရင္းခံမ်ားေၾကာင့္ ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္ဘက္တြင္ ရပ္တည္ေနသည္ဟု ေကာက္ခ်က္မခ်မိေစရန္မွာ အလြန္တရာ ခဲယဥ္းလွပါသည္။ ထုိ႔ျပင္ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါ၏ ေရးသားခ်က္မ်ား၊ မီဒီယာေပၚတြင္ လူလုံးျပမႈမ်ားျဖင့္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ဳိးတုန္းသတ္ျဖတ္မႈကို ျငင္းဆန္ေနမႈကုိ OUP ကလည္း အနည္းဆုံး သြယ္ဝုိက္ေသာနည္းျဖင့္ ေထာက္ခံေနသည့္ႏွယ္ ျဖစ္ေနပါသည္။
ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္၏ ဖိႏွိပ္မႈပစ္မွတ္ျဖစ္ေသာ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေၾကာင္း အညႊန္းေဆာင္းပါး ေရးသားရန္ ေဒါက္တာလီဒါအား OUP က တာဝန္ေပးျခင္းအေပၚ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ ကန္႔ကြက္ေနျခင္းထက္ ပုိမုိ၍ ျပင္းထန္ေသာ ေနာက္ဆက္တြဲရလဒ္မ်ားကုိ ျဖစ္ေပၚေစသည့္ တစုံတရာ ရွိေသးသည္ကုိ ထပ္ေလာင္းေျပာျပလုိပါသည္။ ျမန္မာအစုိးရကဲ့သုိ႔ေသာအစုိးရမ်ဳိးမ်ားက ၎တုိ႔ႏွင့္ အျမင္တူေသာ ပညာရွင္မ်ားမွတဆင့္ ကမၻာတလႊား ၾသဇာတိကၠမရွိေသာ အေနာက္တုိင္းပညာေရးအဖြဲ႕အစည္းမ်ားကုိ ၎တုိ႔၏ ဝါဒျဖန္႔က်က္ရာ စင္ျမင့္မ်ားအျဖစ္ အသုံးခ်ျခင္းအား ခံၾကမည္ေလာဟူေသာ ေမးခြန္းပင္ျဖစ္သည္။ ကိန္းဘရစ္တကၠသိုလ္ပုံႏွိပ္ထုတ္ေဝေရး နွင့္တရုတ္ျပည္ (သို႔မဟုတ္) LSE ႏွင့္ ကဒါဖီအစုိးရ စသည့္ ဟုိးေလးတေၾကာ္ အျဖစ္မ်ားကုိ သတိရစရာ ျဖစ္ေစပါသည္။
ဤေနရာတြင္ "ဂ်ဴးကေလးသူငယ္ ကယ္ဆယ္ေရး" မွ အသက္ရွင္က်န္ရစ္ေသာ ၿဗိတိန္ႏုိင္ငံမွ ရုသ္ဘားနတ္ ၏ စကားမ်ားကုိ ကုိးကားရန္ သင့္ေလ်ာ္လွသည္။
"ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔သက္တမ္းအတြင္းမွာ 'Never again" (ေနာင္ဘယ္ေတာ့မွ ထပ္မျဖစ္ေစရ) ဆုိသည္ကုိ ေအာင္ျမင္ရရွိေစမည့္ပုံ မေပၚပါ။ သုိ႔ရာတြင္ တခ်ိန္ခ်ိန္မွာ ျဖစ္ေျမာက္လာေစရန္အတြက္ အားထုတ္ႀကိဳးပမ္းမႈမ်ား ျပဳလုပ္ရန္သည္ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔၏ တာဝန္ျဖစ္သည္။ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တို႔အားလုံး ကုိယ္စီကုိယ္ငွ တစုံတရာကုိ ျပဳလုပ္ႏုိင္သည္။ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ ကို္ယ္တိုင္၏ အၾကမ္းဖက္လုိေသာ တဒဂၤမထိန္းခ်ဳပ္ႏုိင္မႈမ်ားကို ခၽြန္းအုပ္ႏုိင္ေရးအတြက္ သင္ယူရန္ အထူးလုိအပ္သည္။ သုိ႔မွသာ အျခားသူမ်ား၏ အၾကမ္းဖက္မႈကုိ ပုိဆုိးလာေအာင္ မီးေလာင္ရာ ေလပင့္ေပးမည့္အစား စကားဝုိင္းတြင္ ေျပာဆုိညွိႏႈိင္းေဆြးေႏြးႏုိင္ေပမည္။
"ျငင္းဆုိမႈကုိ သည္းခံျခင္းနွင့္ ျငင္းဆုိမႈကုိ ဖုံးကြယ္ေပးျခင္းသည္ အဆိပ္အေတာက္ အျပင္းဆုံးေသာ အခ်က္တခ်က္ပင္ ျဖစ္ေကာင္းျဖစ္ႏုိင္သည္။ 'ျငင္းဆုိမႈ'သည္ လူသားမ်ဳိးႏြယ္အေပၚက်ဴးလြန္ေသာ ရာဇဝတ္မႈမ်ားကုိ က်ဴးလြန္ရန္ အျခားသူမ်ားအား တံခါးမ်ားကုိ ဖြင့္ေပးသည္။ အဘယ္ေၾကာင့္ဆုိေသာ္ အျခားက်ဴးလြန္သူမ်ား အျပစ္ေပးမခံရဘဲ လြတ္ေျမာက္သြားသည္ကုိ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ မ်က္ဝါးထင္ထင္ ျမင္ရေသာေၾကာင့္ျဖစ္သည္။ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တို႔တြင္ စိတ္အားထက္သန္မႈ၊ စူးစမ္းလုိစိတ္ကုိ လႈံ႕ေဆာ္မႈႏွင့္ အမွန္တရားကို ေဖာ္ထုတ္ရန္ ရည္သန္မႈတုိ႔ကုိ လုိအပ္သည္။"
"ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔သည္ ျငင္းဆုိမႈမ်ားစြာ ႀကံဳေတြ႕ခဲ့ရသျဖင့္ လူအမ်ားစုမွာ သတင္းအမွားမ်ား၊ ဝါဒမႈိင္းမ်ားႏွင့္ အမွန္တရားအၾကား ခြဲျခားႏုိင္ျခင္း လုံးဝ မရွိေတာ့ေခ်။" (Ruth Barnett, 27 Jan 2018, "I Survived The Holocaust. Merely
Remembering It Is No Longer Good Enough", RightsInfo.org,
ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအေၾကာင္း အညႊန္းေဆာင္းပါးေရးသားျခင္းအတြက္ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါအား တာဝန္ေပးရန္ ဆုံးျဖတ္ခဲ့ေသာ ျပန္လည္စဥ္းစားရန္ OUP အား ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ တုိက္တြန္းပါသည္။ အကယ္၍ ဤေဆာင္းပါးမ်ားကုိ ထုတ္ေဝပါကလည္း ရွင္းလင္းျပတ္သားေသာ ေျဖရွင္းေၾကညာခ်က္တခုကို ထည့္သြင္းေဖာ္ျပေပးရန္ ကၽြႏု္ပ္တုိ႔ ေတာင္းဆုိပါသည္။ ထုိေျဖရွင္းေၾကညာခ်က္မွာ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါသည္ လြတ္လပ္ေသာ ေလ့လာသုံးသပ္သူတဦး မဟုတ္ေၾကာင္း၊ ယင္းေဆာင္းပါးကုိလည္း ဘက္လုိက္မႈ မရွိေသာ အညႊန္းေဆာင္းပါးအျဖစ္ မသတ္မွတ္ေၾကာင္း၊ ဤသည္မွာ ေဒါက္တာလုိက္ဒါ၏ ထင္ျမင္ယူဆခ်က္သက္သက္မွ်သာ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း ေျဖရွင္းေၾကညာခ်က္ျဖစ္သည္။ ဤသည္မွာ MSF က မွတ္တမ္းထင္ထားသည့္ ၂၀၁၇ ခုႏွစ္ ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္၏ စစ္ဆင္ေရးစတင္သည့္ ပထမ လအတြင္းတြင္ ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာ ၆၇၀၀ ေက်ာ္ေသဆုံးမႈႏွင့္ လေပါင္းမ်ားစြာအတြင္း ဒုကၡသည္ ၆၈၀၀၀၀ ထြက္ေျပးခဲ့ၾကရသည့္ အျငင္းပြားဖြယ္ လူမ်ဳိးစုအေၾကာင္း ေဆာင္းပါးျဖစ္ေနေသာေၾကာင့္ပင္ ျဖစ္သည္၊
လက္မွတ္ထုိးသူမ်ား -
1. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, University Professor and a founding member of the Institute for Comparative Literature and Society, Columbia University, USA
2. Nursyahbani Katjasungkana, National Coordinator of Indonesia Legal Aid Association for Women, Indonesia
3. Rainer Schulze, Professor Emeritus of Modern European History, University of Essex, and Founding Editor of the journal “The Holocaust in History and Memory,” UK
4. Noam Chomsky, American linguist, philosopher and activist (Institute Professor, MIT), USA
5. Mofidul Hoque, author and activist, Director, Center for the Study of Genocide and Justice, Liberation War Museum, Bangladesh
6. Tapan Bose, filmmaker, human rights defender, India
7. Richard Falk, Professor of International Law, Emeritus, Princeton University, USA
8. Barbara Harrell-Bond, OBE Emerita Professor and Founding Director of The Refugee Studies Centre, University of Oxford 1982–1996, UK
9. Barbara Harriss-White, Emeritus Professor of Development Studies, Oxford University, Emeritus Fellow of Wolfson College, Oxford, UK
10. Ritu Dewan, Vice President, Indian Society of Labour Economics; Director Centre for Development Research and Action; Executive Director, Centre for Study of Society and Secularism; President, Indian Association for Women's Studies (2014-17)
11. Prof. Gregory Stanton, Founding Chairman, Genocide Watch & George Mason University. Arlington, Virginia, USA
12. Johan Galtung, Founder, Peace Studies
13. Youk Chhang, Chairman, Genocide Documentation Center of Camboda/The Sleuk Rith Institute, Cambodia
14. Abdul Malik Mujahid, Chair Emeritus Parliament of the World's Religions
15. Karen Jungblut, Director of Global Initiatives, USC Shoah Foundation, USA
16. María do Mar Castro Varela, Professor of Pedagogy and Social Work and activist, Alice Salomon University, Berlin, Germany
17. C Abrar, Professor of International Relations, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh
18. John H. Weiss, Associate Professor of History, Cornell University, USA
19. Khin Mai Aung, Burmese American civil rights lawyer and writer, New York, USA
20. Maung Zarni, Burmese human rights activist and scholar, Genocide Documentation Center of Cambodia/The Sleuk Rith Institute
21. Harn Yawnghwe, Executive Director, Associates to Develop Democratic Burma Inc./Euro-Burma Office, Canada
22. Bilal Raschid, Past President of Burmese Muslim Association
23. Swagato Sarkar, DPhil (Oxford), Associate Professor, O.P. Jindal Global University, India
24. Sumeet Mhaskar, DPhil (Oxford), O.P. Jindal Global University, India
25. Prof. Donesh Mohan, Academic, India
26. Dr. Peggy Mohan, Author, India
27. Prof. Ranabir Samaddar, Academic, India
28. Rita Manchanda, Feminist writer, India
29. Samsul Islam, Author, India
30. Neelima Sharma, Theatre activist, India
31. Jawed Naqvi, journalist, India
32. Seema Mustafa, journalist, India
33. Ashok Agrwaal, lawyer, India
34. Dr. Walid Salem, Al Quds University & the Director of The Centre for Democracy and Community Development, East Jerusalem, Palestine
35. Jun Nishikawa, PhD, professor emeritus, Waseda University, Japan
36. Dr Ravi P Bhatia, an educationist and peace researcher & Retired professor, Delhi University, India
37. Gill H. boehringer, Honorary Senior Research Fellow, Macquarie University School of Law, Sydney , Australia
38. Paul Copeland, C M, (Recipient, Order of Canada), Lawyer, Toronto, Canada
39. U Kyaw Win, Professor Emeritus, Orange Coast College, California, USA
40. Professor Michael W. Charney, Academic, UK
41. Dr Amit Upadhyay, Assistant professor, TISS Hyderabad, India
42. Dr. Nicola Suyin Pocock, United Nations University International Institute of Global Health, Malaysia
43. Rezaur Rahman Lenin,Academic Activist, Adjuct Faculty, Eastern University Bangladesh & Executive Director, Law Life Culture, Bangladesh
44. Natalie Brinham, ESRC PhD scholar, Queen Mary University of London School of Law, UK
45. Niranjan Sahoo, PhD, Senior Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, India
46. Prof. Dr. Célestin Tagou, Prof. of PS, IR P&D Studies, Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and International Relations, Protestant University of Central Africa, Executive Secretariat of the Network of Protestant Universities of Africa
47. Dr. Tilman Evers, Germany
48. Jørgen Johansen, Deputy Editor of Journal of Resistance Studies, Sweden
49. Sarah Tobias, philanthropist & activist, Canada
50. Miki Lanza, Movimento Nonviolento c/o Centro Studi Sereno Regis, Torino, Italy
51. Oskar Butcher, human rights activist and scholar, Germany
52. Professor Emeritus George Kent, University of Hawai'i and Deputy Editor, World Nutrition, USA
53. Sebastian Eck, Galtung-Institut, Switzerland
54. Robert J. Burrowes Ph.D., co-founder 'The People's Charter to Create a Nonviolent World', Australia
55. Shadi Sadr, Executive Director of Justice for Iran, UK
56. Tasnim Nazeer, Award-winning journalist and Universal Peace Federation Ambassador for Peace, UK
57. Emir Ramic, Academic, Ph.D., Chairman of the Institute for Research of Genocide, Canada
58. Nadeem Haque, P.Eng. - Director of the Institute of Higher Reasoning (IHR), Canada
59. Diana de la Rúa Eugenio, President of Asociación Respuesta para la Paz -ARP-, member NGO of OAS, President of International Peace Research Association Foundation -IPRA Foundation, Argentina
60. Dr. Syeda Hamid, Academic and Author, India
61. Dr. Siddiq Wahid, Historian and Educationist, India
62. Dr. Syed Ahmed Haroon, Psychiatrist, Pakistan
63. Anis Haroon, Poet, Pakistan
64. Sushil Pyakurel, Adviser to President of Nepal
65. Porf. Noor Ahmad Baba, Academic, India
66. Anand Patwardhan, Filmmaker, India
67. Rodolphe Prom, President, Destination Justice, Cambodia
68. Doreen Chen, Co-Director, Destination Justice, Cambodia
69. Syed Zainul Abedin, Painter, Poet, Journalist, Bangladesh
70. Dr. Navsharan Singh, Researcher and author, India
71. Leo fernandez, IT Specialist, India
72. Feroz Medhi, Filmmaker social activist, Canada
73. John Packer, Associate Professor of Law and Director, Human Rights Research and Education Centre, University of Ottawa, Canada
74. Fathima, MA Women's Studies Student, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, India
75. Rana Jawad, University of Bath, UK
76. Prof. Dr. Sami A. Al-Arian Director and Public Affairs Professor, Center for Islam and Global Affairs İslam ve Küresel İlişkiler Merkezi, Turkey
77. Penny Green, Professor of Law and Globalisation and Director of the International State Crime Initiative, Queen Mary University of London, UK
78. Karen Busby, Professor of Law & Director, Centre for Human Rights Research, University of Manitoba
79. Lyal S. Sunga, Visiting Professor in International Relations and Global Politics, The American University of Rome, Italy
80. Dr. Christina Szurlej, Assistant Professor, St. Thomas University (Canada)
81. Matthew Smith, Chief Executive Officer, Fortify Rights
Share:

ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားအတြက္ လုံျခဳံသည့္နယ္ေျမတစ္ခု တည္ေထာင္ၿပီး အိႏၵိယ၊ တ႐ုတ္ႏွင့္ အာဆီယံနိုင္ငံ ေစာင့္ၾကည့္ရန္ လိုအပ္ဟု ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ရွ္ နိုင္ငံျခားေရးဝန္ႀကီးေျပာ

Posted on February 09, 2019   အိႏၵိယဝန္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္ မိုဒီႏွင့္ ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ရွ္နိုင္ငံျခားေရးဝန္ႀကီး မိုမန္တို႔ ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီလ (၇)...

Blog Archive

Theme Support

Need our help to upload or customize this blogger template? Contact me with details about the theme customization you need.