Editorial Desk :
British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said on the 4th of September that he would host talks at the UN this month over allegations Myanmar’s military committed genocide against the Rohingya minority, warning the perpetrators must be brought to justice. Hunt said he also wanted to visit Myanmar to meet with military leaders and Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, the country’s de facto leader, who has faced criticism for failing to speak out.
A UN-backed fact-finding mission last month called for an international investigation and prosecution of Myanmar’s army chief and five other top military commanders for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes against the Rohingya. The leaders strongly deny the claims, and Hunt
acknowledged that bringing those responsible to justice would be a “long hard road”. Hundreds of world leaders will participate in the 73rd session of the UN General Assembly in New York. The annual gathering will be open on September 18 and is scheduled to last for nine working days.
While Secretary Hunt may choose to believe that he can provide justice in the clear cases of murder, rape, and genocide by the Myanmar military how is he going to do that? The UK at this point in time has basically zero economic or political leverage with Myanmar. China and the US have far greater clout, and so does the EU — but the UK can’t count on the EU to do what it desires.
To get the Tatmadaw held accountable for its crimes is next to impossible in today’s Myanmar — the general public see it as a protector of the people. Meanwhile the army is cautious in justifying its actions to the people — as we have recently seen in the amateur way they tried to defend its actions against the Rohingya. Most of its military hardware is supplied by China, Russia and India — there is no way the UK can prevent these arms sales to the Tatmadaw.
So how to process actions against a military which refuses to acknowledge wrong doing? A concerted effort by the EU, the US and ASEAN countries to open international warrants against the major commanders in charge of Rakhine State is definitely the best way to go. Such actions would make any army commander think twice before carrying out genocide against its own people. Such army commanders would always be fearful of leaving Myanmar, not knowing in what airport they could be charged and arrested, to be put to trial. Short of this there is almost no practical way of bringing the perpetrators of the crimes against the Rohingya to justice.
British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said on the 4th of September that he would host talks at the UN this month over allegations Myanmar’s military committed genocide against the Rohingya minority, warning the perpetrators must be brought to justice. Hunt said he also wanted to visit Myanmar to meet with military leaders and Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, the country’s de facto leader, who has faced criticism for failing to speak out.
A UN-backed fact-finding mission last month called for an international investigation and prosecution of Myanmar’s army chief and five other top military commanders for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes against the Rohingya. The leaders strongly deny the claims, and Hunt
acknowledged that bringing those responsible to justice would be a “long hard road”. Hundreds of world leaders will participate in the 73rd session of the UN General Assembly in New York. The annual gathering will be open on September 18 and is scheduled to last for nine working days.
While Secretary Hunt may choose to believe that he can provide justice in the clear cases of murder, rape, and genocide by the Myanmar military how is he going to do that? The UK at this point in time has basically zero economic or political leverage with Myanmar. China and the US have far greater clout, and so does the EU — but the UK can’t count on the EU to do what it desires.
To get the Tatmadaw held accountable for its crimes is next to impossible in today’s Myanmar — the general public see it as a protector of the people. Meanwhile the army is cautious in justifying its actions to the people — as we have recently seen in the amateur way they tried to defend its actions against the Rohingya. Most of its military hardware is supplied by China, Russia and India — there is no way the UK can prevent these arms sales to the Tatmadaw.
So how to process actions against a military which refuses to acknowledge wrong doing? A concerted effort by the EU, the US and ASEAN countries to open international warrants against the major commanders in charge of Rakhine State is definitely the best way to go. Such actions would make any army commander think twice before carrying out genocide against its own people. Such army commanders would always be fearful of leaving Myanmar, not knowing in what airport they could be charged and arrested, to be put to trial. Short of this there is almost no practical way of bringing the perpetrators of the crimes against the Rohingya to justice.
[ By way of clarification of any possible confusion in yesterday’s commentary it is stated that the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court did not interfere with the order of bail granted by the High Court Division against conviction of Begum Khaleda Zia in the Zia Orphanage Trust case, though the government side strenuously insisted that the bail should be disallowed. She could not be released for other cases against her. —Editor ]
