Yingluck: Rohingya ' Might Join Southern Insurgency'

[geriatrickid]

Seems quite a few quite here keen on Muslim Immigration, so have you been lobbying your home governments to increase Muslim Immigration and non-integration there?

In the past while I lived there yes I did lobby for the humane treatment of persecuted people admitted into the country regardless of their religion.

Bless you my child.

Usually the caveat is, as long is it is not in my neighborhood and someone else pays for it.

[simple1]

I'm not trying to be anti Muslim in my reservations about an influx of rohingya into Thailand, but I do think it is dangerous and I even think Thai Muslims would be hesitant about letting them in. So I propose the following challenge: if anyone here knows Thai Muslims ask them what they would think about rohingya remaining or settling in Thailand and post the results of what they said here.

The reason I am saying this is that I really do think Thai Muslims aren't thrilled with the idea either. And the reason that would be so is that not all Islam is the same. There is conflict between different branches of Islam (most notably Shiite and Sunni) and not all Muslims think alike. From what I know of Thai Islam it does differ a bit from the Islam practiced on other regions. For example much like how Thai Buddhism incorporates a lot of animistic beliefs, so does Thai Islam. Thai Muslims have their little "good luck" rituals the same as Thai Buddhists. The more stringent branches of Islam may consider what Thai Muslims do to be witchcraft. I don't think Thai Muslims are gonna be real happy with other Muslims telling them they're not Muslim enough.

I asked by wife who is Thai Muslim (Sunni) and she said she has no issues whatsoever. given they are having such a hard time in Burma, why not help them. I did see a media report today (BKK Post) quoting an Islamic leader in the Deep South who is organising food etc for the Rohingya who have been detained, who said the Rohingya did not even know their were Muslims in Thailand. As you know their intention was to transit through Thailand to Malaysia and on to Indonesia, ultimate destination Australia, but were duped & were being setup for being sold to Malaysians for low cost/slave labour.

Personally I have no idea of the interpretation of Islam by the Rohingya, but you are absolutely correct in your comments regards Thai Muslims, at least the many that I know in Pattaya

Like so many of the so called refugees, they are travelling to Australia, the perceived land of milk and honey. What a disgrace...my understanding of a genuine(UNHCR) refugee is that they travel to the first country where they are free from persecution...in this case it would be Malaysia or Indonesia.

These people are nothing but queue jumpers who know the Australian Government is a soft touch and will give in to the people smugglers every time.

Meanwhile some poor bastard is sitting in an camp in Africa with his family for 10 years or more, who really deserves the name refugee but cannot leave as the humanitarian immigration quota has been reached or exceeded by these illegal immigrants who get on a boat, sail 50 miles from Indonesia, call 000 on their mobile phone (the Australian version of 999 or 911) and DEMAND to be rescued by the Australian Navy after disabling the boat they are on.

In the meantime they have thrown their passports and any other identification overboard so that it is very difficult to determine the veracity of their claims for refugee status. I only hope there is a change of government in Australia this year as the country and way of life is slowly but surely being destroyed.

Can you tell me why the ratio of males to females of these "refugees" is 100 to 1 or more? Is the place they are leaving so bad for them , but not so bad that they leave the missus and kids behind?

Good for Yingluck to have the guts to say what a lot of people think. Pity there aren't more politicians prepared to tell it like it is.

Fairly easy to explain the male to female ratio, the men would be aiming to establish a new life as a bread winner, then send money back to the family. At some time in the future aim to have their wife and children join them.

If asylum seekers destroy their ID they are not permitted to enter mainland Australia until security checks etc are completed offshore. If the authorities are unable to verify ID they are returned to their country of origin. Unlikely this would happen to Rohingya due to the oppression by the Burmese government, so would have to wait for UNHCR to facilitate refugee intakes with signatory countries. A few years back UNHCR had 750k registered refugees. The settlement numbers were 75k a year, so simple maths say that refugees were waiting up to 10 years to be settled. Also note that some Rohingya have been living in camps in Bangladesh for 20 years, with no relief in sight. No wonder some are attempting to 'jump the queue". However, the reality is their is no queue for them to join as they are stateless, Burma will not issue citizenship papers.

FYI early 2010 their were an estimated 15.4 million refugees worldwide; details at http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jun/20/refugee-statistics-unhcr-data

[Sing_Sling]

From recollection BKK Post mentioned the aimed for destination for the Rohingya was Australia - not a particularly good idea due the revised policy of offshore processing where they could be held for years, but better than being refugees in Malaysia

I'd be interested in the link for that - just to see where the BKK Post got that information . . . and why would Malaysia be worse place for the Rohingya than some godforsaken island somewhere in the Pacific for ten or so years?? Just asking . . .

[simple1]

Australia? Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear . . . They are so under-educated that they probably don't even know an 'Australia' . . .

My youngest daughter's riding instructor is a Burmese Muslim (yes, they still prefer to call it Burma, not Myanmar) and his explanation was quite simple . . . Burma doesn't want them. They know Thailand doesn't want them. They're not so sure about Bangla Desh . . . but they know they'll be treated well in Malaysia.

If they had terrorist tendencies they would use them in their home country, not somewhere else - doesn't that seem obvious?!

Australia? Hardly

Malaysia does not welcome Rohingya refugees. Rohingya who've made their homes in Malaysia are unable to get a proper job or give their children an education because they don't have legal status in the country.. As Scott has mentioned Malaysia hasn't signed the UN Convention on Refugees. That means that those who arrive in the country are, as far as the government is concerned, illegal migrants.

There is already a Burmese Rohingya community in Australia, so suggest you're incorrect. Source http://www.brca.org.au/

FYI: in 2011 Australia had negotiated a refugee swap with Malaysia but was overruled in the High Court as it concluded that Malaysia did not offer adequate protection for refugees in law. Source http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14727471

Edited January 18, 2013 by simple1

[Scott]

This is a group of people who really don't seem to care much about where they go as long as they get out of Burma. Those in Bangladesh aren't going to be afforded much as far as resettlement goes either. Bangladesh is also not a signatory to the UN Refugee protocols.

Australia is, of course, the plum of places to head for, but these people simply do not have access to the finances or connections to get to Australia.

[Buchholz]

PM rules out refugee centre for Rohingya migrants

BANGKOK, Jan 19 – Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra disagreed with the idea for a displaced person centre for Rohingya migrants awaiting repatriation from Thailand after illegally entering into the country.

She said such a centre will not solve the problem in the long run as the Rohingya minority people want to settle down in a safe place.

The Foreign Ministry will have to discuss with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) on procedures for dealing with the Rohingya migrants and whether a refugee centre is viable, she said, adding that coordination with the country of origin and third countries is also necessary for a clear solution to the problem.

The Rohingya migrants will not be repatriated to Myanmar for the time being, Ms Yingluck said.

Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul said responsible government agencies will have to deal with the Rohingya migrants under Thai law for illegal entry but the procedure could be flexibly applied, especially regarding women and children.

Human trafficking victims will be separated from illegal migrants and categories of offences will be clearly defined, bearing in mind humanitarian principles, he said.

An immediate solution involves sheltering and taking care of the Rohingya illegal migrants while the Foreign Ministry will negotiate with Myanmar, other countries and international organisations on their resettlement, Mr Surapong said.

The UNHCR, International Organisation for Migration (IOM), UNICEF and International Red Cross are among the agencies to hold talks with the Thai foreign ministry to find a sustainable solution with an emphasis on Thailand’s sovereignty, he said.

He said the Foreign Ministry began initial talks with UNHCR and IOM on Tuesday to prepare a framework for assistance to the Rohingya migrants while representatives of international agencies on humanitarianism will be invited to visit the temporary Rohingya holding centres.

Mr Surapong expressed appreciation to the Muslim community in Songkhla, where over 800 Rohingya migrants were apprehended, for giving donations and other assistance to the ethnic people.

-- TNA 2013-01-19

[Greer]

Unfortunately I think I have to agree that allowing Muslim refugees into the country to settle in an area already torn apart by violent Muslim against Buddhist attacks, has to be courting danger. As pointed out elsewhere, there is a huge imbalance between the genders, and that could easily indicate that it is the male of the family who seeks refugee status, then later sends for the rest of the clan to join them - this has happened elsewhere in the world, so no guarantee that it cant happen here.

The problem is not the Muslims as such, the problem is putting more of the same group into a place infested with violent extremists, and then hoping like hell that they wont end up joining in to set up a state of their own with fellows of a like mind.

I have quite a few friends who are Muslim, and they are fine people who also hate to see the ongoing violence - as I said, the problem is the extremists - and sadly, religions of any type often do breed extremists and fundamentalists, who see nothing wrong with killing to achieve their selfish goals.

If the UN want to prevent refugees being sent on to another country, then they can bloody-well send some cash to help Thailand pay for them too.

[OzMick]

Why should other countries pay for what is a local problem? If Thailand has a problem with Burmese refugees, why don't they apply some pressure on the Myanmar government to sort it at the source?

Let me guess, that might cause some problems with their investment opportunities.

[simple1]

From recollection BKK Post mentioned the aimed for destination for the Rohingya was Australia - not a particularly good idea due the revised policy of offshore processing where they could be held for years, but better than being refugees in Malaysia

I'd be interested in the link for that - just to see where the BKK Post got that information . . . and why would Malaysia be worse place for the Rohingya than some godforsaken island somewhere in the Pacific for ten or so years?? Just asking . . .

Not allowed on the forum to provide a direct link to BKK Post, However a quote from an article in the 16/01/13 edition.

"He only knew what a labour broker in Myanmar had told him that once he arrived in Thailand, somebody would pick him up along with the others and take them on to Malaysia where they would find a way to migrate to Australia via Indonesia." Obviously BS from the human traffickers as they were destined to be sold to "employers" in Malaysia.

To answer the question regards Malaysia, they are not a signatory to the UN Convention for refugees; basically no future for them in Malaysia and would have to await resettlement to a third country - a very long waiting period with no guarantees that they would be resettled.

Edited January 19, 2013 by simple1

[Sing_Sling]

Australia? Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear . . . They are so under-educated that they probably don't even know an 'Australia' . . .

My youngest daughter's riding instructor is a Burmese Muslim (yes, they still prefer to call it Burma, not Myanmar) and his explanation was quite simple . . . Burma doesn't want them. They know Thailand doesn't want them. They're not so sure about Bangla Desh . . . but they know they'll be treated well in Malaysia.

If they had terrorist tendencies they would use them in their home country, not somewhere else - doesn't that seem obvious?!

Australia? Hardly

Malaysia does not welcome Rohingya refugees. Rohingya who've made their homes in Malaysia are unable to get a proper job or give their children an education because they don't have legal status in the country.. As Scott has mentioned Malaysia hasn't signed the UN Convention on Refugees. That means that those who arrive in the country are, as far as the government is concerned, illegal migrants.

There is already a Burmese Rohingya community in Australia, so suggest you're incorrect. Source http://www.brca.org.au/

FYI: in 2011 Australia had negotiated a refugee swap with Malaysia but was overruled in the High Court as it concluded that Malaysia did not offer adequate protection for refugees in law. Source http://www.bbc.co.uk...acific-14727471

The refugee swap with Australia was an abortion by the government from the get go - Australia has such a poor record of refugees dying and being kept for years in internment camps in Australia or on foreign islands that to disparage other countries is simply a typical example of 'white tribe of Asia' arrogance.

It is true that Malaysia are and have been lacking many fundamental guarantees but steps are being taken to alter that . . . http://bazuki.com/recent/?p=579 or: http://malaysianrohingyarefugeessosaity.blogspot.com/

More is being done for the Rohingya in Malaysia than elsewhere . . . the best of a bad deal, perhaps?

Oh and:

There is already a Burmese Rohingya community in Australia, so suggest you're incorrect. Source http://www.brca.org.au/

. . . where did I say there are no Rohingya in Australia? I said that these refugees probably have never heard of the place - may I suggest you do your reading more carefully . . . and that the BRCA hq is in Lakemba . . . nice . . . the Muslim communities are taking care of them.

I think the focus of our ire should be directed at Myanmar and Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been a terrible disappointment in this regard.

But yes, as for the Rohingya joining the Thai militants . . . just another xenophobic Thai idea

[simple1]

Australia? Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear . . . They are so under-educated that they probably don't even know an 'Australia' . . .

My youngest daughter's riding instructor is a Burmese Muslim (yes, they still prefer to call it Burma, not Myanmar) and his explanation was quite simple . . . Burma doesn't want them. They know Thailand doesn't want them. They're not so sure about Bangla Desh . . . but they know they'll be treated well in Malaysia.

If they had terrorist tendencies they would use them in their home country, not somewhere else - doesn't that seem obvious?!

Australia? Hardly

Malaysia does not welcome Rohingya refugees. Rohingya who've made their homes in Malaysia are unable to get a proper job or give their children an education because they don't have legal status in the country.. As Scott has mentioned Malaysia hasn't signed the UN Convention on Refugees. That means that those who arrive in the country are, as far as the government is concerned, illegal migrants.

There is already a Burmese Rohingya community in Australia, so suggest you're incorrect. Source http://www.brca.org.au/

FYI: in 2011 Australia had negotiated a refugee swap with Malaysia but was overruled in the High Court as it concluded that Malaysia did not offer adequate protection for refugees in law. Source http://www.bbc.co.uk...acific-14727471

The refugee swap with Australia was an abortion by the government from the get go - Australia has such a poor record of refugees dying and being kept for years in internment camps in Australia or on foreign islands that to disparage other countries is simply a typical example of 'white tribe of Asia' arrogance.

It is true that Malaysia are and have been lacking many fundamental guarantees but steps are being taken to alter that . . . http://bazuki.com/re...y.blogspot.com/

More is being done for the Rohingya in Malaysia than elsewhere . . . the best of a bad deal, perhaps?

Oh and:

There is already a Burmese Rohingya community in Australia, so suggest you're incorrect. Source http://www.brca.org.au/

. . . where did I say there are no Rohingya in Australia? I said that these refugees probably have never heard of the place - may I suggest you do your reading more carefully . . . and that the BRCA hq is in Lakemba . . . nice . . . the Muslim communities are taking care of them.

I think the focus of our ire should be directed at Myanmar and Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been a terrible disappointment in this regard.

But yes, as for the Rohingya joining the Thai militants . . . just another xenophobic Thai idea

A somewhat harsh criticism of Australia refugee intake that has now been increased to 20k per annum However as Australia is a G20 member people will say that as Australia only ranks 46th in refugee intake it's not stepping up to it's responsibilities. .More commentary at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-06-21/australia-ranks-46th-in-refugee-intake-table/2766300

Agree that Aung San Suu Kyi has been a disappointment in her support for human rights for the Rohingya, guess she has to "fit in" with local politics.

Misunderstood your comment on Rohingya in Australia.

[Sing_Sling]

A somewhat harsh criticism of Australia refugee intake that has now been increased to 20k per annum However as Australia is a G20 member people will say that as Australia only ranks 46th in refugee intake it's not stepping up to it's responsibilities. .More commentary at http://www.abc.net.a...e-table/2766300

Agree that Aung San Suu Kyi has been a disappointment in her support for human rights for the Rohingya, guess she has to "fit in" with local politics.

Misunderstood your comment on Rohingya in Australia. (no worries)

Yes, Suu Kyi is finding out that being in government is a lot tougher than being on the sidelines with no restrictions (in terms of demands)

As for Australia's immigration policies - I think they have pretty much always been deplorable, racist and indefensible . . . with the expected knee-jerk reactions when pulled up on them by larger partners.

Whether it was the White Australia policy, the anti-Kanak vitriole, the anti-Asian policy spanning longer than federation, the anti-German land-grab and immigration policy etc . . .

Nah, Australia has shown its racist side since day one . . . and is even now loathe to let refugees land on the largest island on earth . . . because we have no space

[Buchholz]

Thai DPM: Rohingya Ethnics Will Be Considered Illegal Migrants

BANGKOK, Jan 19 (Bernama) - Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul said Rohingya ethnics from Myanmar fleeing to Thailand will be considered as illegal migrants who will be dealt with according to the country's laws, Thai News Agency (TNA) reported.

Rohingya refugees are currently being held in prison.

Continued:

http://www.bernama.c...d.php?id=922951

.

Edited January 19, 2013 by Buchholz

[JemJem]

I insist that the US and the West, in general, was wrong in praising the Myanmar regime recently.

I don't know about you but I wouldn't go to certain countries due to my principles (such as countries punishing homosexuality, like Iran and Uganda; Sharia-based countries like Saudi Arabia; and countries that suck regarding human rights, like Myanmar).

I feel that some of you are biased against the Rohinghya folks just because they are Muslims. As I wrote before, if you claim to have compassion for people, you should differentiate between violence-makers/spreaders and ordinary, peaceful folks.

[tominbkk]

There are more than 110.000 Rohingya in Thailand already. Rohingya are a demographic and political threat, as most of them are fundamentalist Sunni. It boggles the mind why they cannot find refuge with Indonesia or Malaysia which are muslim countries with together more than 250 million inhabitants.

thanks for saying that, I have been thinking the same for quite some time now....

[Fozfromoz]

A somewhat harsh criticism of Australia refugee intake that has now been increased to 20k per annum However as Australia is a G20 member people will say that as Australia only ranks 46th in refugee intake it's not stepping up to it's responsibilities. .More commentary at http://www.abc.net.a...e-table/2766300

Agree that Aung San Suu Kyi has been a disappointment in her support for human rights for the Rohingya, guess she has to "fit in" with local politics.

Misunderstood your comment on Rohingya in Australia. (no worries)

Yes, Suu Kyi is finding out that being in government is a lot tougher than being on the sidelines with no restrictions (in terms of demands)

As for Australia's immigration policies - I think they have pretty much always been deplorable, racist and indefensible . . . with the expected knee-jerk reactions when pulled up on them by larger partners.

Whether it was the White Australia policy, the anti-Kanak vitriole, the anti-Asian policy spanning longer than federation, the anti-German land-grab and immigration policy etc . . .

Nah, Australia has shown its racist side since day one . . . and is even now loathe to let refugees land on the largest island on earth . . . because we have no space

Tell ya what mate. I just found a bit of space, just for you if you want it. Nice little creek south of Darwin. Good for swimming.

[simple1]

There are more than 110.000 Rohingya in Thailand already. Rohingya are a demographic and political threat, as most of them are fundamentalist Sunni. It boggles the mind why they cannot find refuge with Indonesia or Malaysia which are muslim countries with together more than 250 million inhabitants.

thanks for saying that, I have been thinking the same for quite some time now....

Contrary to many who think so, their is not a global co-ordination in the Islamic community. Each Islamic country has it's own agenda and power/political conflict issues amongst the various factions.

Try putting yourself in the position of the Malaysian government. Current estimates are 500k illegal Indonesian workers in Malaysia with all the tensions that causes both politically and economically. Also Malaysia already has 101,080 refugees and asylum-seekers registered with UNHCR, plus an estimated 50k unregistered.

Indonesia has tensions being caused as most of their Muslim refugees are Shiite. Also resentment by some of the local population due to resources being diverted in a country that struggles with poverty and housing for its own citizens.

[Bluespunk]

Seems quite a few quite here keen on Muslim Immigration, so have you been lobbying your home governments to increase Muslim Immigration and non-integration there?

In the past while I lived there yes I did lobby for the humane treatment of persecuted people admitted into the country regardless of their religion.

Bless you my child.

Usually the caveat is, as long is it is not in my neighborhood and someone else pays for it.

Maybe, but not always. Judge people on their actions not their faith.

[Sing_Sling]

A somewhat harsh criticism of Australia refugee intake that has now been increased to 20k per annum However as Australia is a G20 member people will say that as Australia only ranks 46th in refugee intake it's not stepping up to it's responsibilities. .More commentary at http://www.abc.net.a...e-table/2766300

Agree that Aung San Suu Kyi has been a disappointment in her support for human rights for the Rohingya, guess she has to "fit in" with local politics.

Misunderstood your comment on Rohingya in Australia. (no worries)

Yes, Suu Kyi is finding out that being in government is a lot tougher than being on the sidelines with no restrictions (in terms of demands)

As for Australia's immigration policies - I think they have pretty much always been deplorable, racist and indefensible . . . with the expected knee-jerk reactions when pulled up on them by larger partners.

Whether it was the White Australia policy, the anti-Kanak vitriole, the anti-Asian policy spanning longer than federation, the anti-German land-grab and immigration policy etc . . .

Nah, Australia has shown its racist side since day one . . . and is even now loathe to let refugees land on the largest island on earth . . . because we have no space

Tell ya what mate. I just found a bit of space, just for you if you want it. Nice little creek south of Darwin. Good for swimming.

So, nothing on topic? Yet another Australian who can't face reality . . . oh, the nice little creek south of Darwin where Aborigines were slaughtered . . . or the other one where Aborigines were poisoned until recently.

Yes, tell me what . . . mate. Or better yet - instead of telling me something why don't you read something, like a history book. Onya, cobber!

thanks for saying that, I have been thinking the same for quite some time now....

. . . and not a shred of proof that they are anything but poor refugees who happen to be Muslim . . . instead we get rants of jihad and fundamentalism (where do you get this idea that they are fundamentalists, I'd be interested to see the documentation?)

[Sing_Sling]

I insist that the US and the West, in general, was wrong in praising the Myanmar regime recently.

I don't know about you but I wouldn't go to certain countries due to my principles (such as countries punishing homosexuality, like Iran and Uganda; Sharia-based countries like Saudi Arabia; and countries that suck regarding human rights, like Myanmar).

I feel that some of you are biased against the Rohinghya folks just because they are Muslims. As I wrote before, if you claim to have compassion for people, you should differentiate between violence-makers/spreaders and ordinary, peaceful folks.

It's easy talking crap about Muslims . . . there wouldn't be many on this forum, added to which it is a popular thing for the ignorant. Uuh, this world-wide shaking hands of the Muslim brotherhood . . . frightening. I don't know how I've managed to live in Singapore and Malaysia for the last ten or so years without being stoned to death by the frothing-at-the-mouth, screaming, burqa-clad locals

[Scott]

I would strongly suggest that posters return to the topic. There are enough off-topic posts.

[sunshine51]

"Thai PM: Rohingya 'might join southern insurgency"

<deleted> Yingluck....the Rohingya have more to worry about than

attempting to join the newly coined "Civil War" in the South...

Have a look at this....

http://www.bbc.co.uk...d-asia-21106819

Sign up to use Tor if you can't get the BBC on the web;

it's assimple as dirt...and free.

Edited January 21, 2013 by sunshine51

[JemJem]

I insist that the US and the West, in general, was wrong in praising the Myanmar regime recently.

I don't know about you but I wouldn't go to certain countries due to my principles (such as countries punishing homosexuality, like Iran and Uganda; Sharia-based countries like Saudi Arabia; and countries that suck regarding human rights, like Myanmar).

I feel that some of you are biased against the Rohinghya folks just because they are Muslims. As I wrote before, if you claim to have compassion for people, you should differentiate between violence-makers/spreaders and ordinary, peaceful folks.

It's easy talking crap about Muslims . . . there wouldn't be many on this forum, added to which it is a popular thing for the ignorant. Uuh, this world-wide shaking hands of the Muslim brotherhood . . . frightening. I don't know how I've managed to live in Singapore and Malaysia for the last ten or so years without being stoned to death by the frothing-at-the-mouth, screaming, burqa-clad locals

Errrr, I think your criticism shouldn't be against me. Yes, I am heavily against Islamism BUT I am also against people who badmouth Muslims in general (many times in this forum, I have spoken out against EDL and other fascist groups).

It is sad that Rohingya are not shown compassion; and it is also sad that the reason for that is that they are Muslims. Just because of the savagery of a number of Islamofascists around the world in unrelated countries, an innocent group of asylum-seekers are shown inhumane treatment. Sad !

[Sing_Sling]

Oh no, I was complementing what you had said, not criticising. My apologies if I offended you.

[JemJem]

Oh no, I was complementing what you had said, not criticising. My apologies if I offended you.

Oh, okay. No problem. Sorry; I had misunderstood you.