Thailand Pushes Back 200 Rohingya Boat People: Navy

[David Mault]

Mosha, well said man. Oh so true.

[simple1]

@rgs2001uk Your probably correct regards Rohingya skill levels as the Burmese government does not provide any schooling for the Rohingya or very limited education up to age seven. I assume you agree this would be an excellent policy for repression & discrimination of a minority (Muslims) by government, no matter now shortsighted.

The Burmese did promise to start providing schools last year, but do not know if this has been put into place.

More like the Burmese junta (oops, now renamed as Republic of the Union of Myanmar) are the ones with a medieval mindset

Edited January 31, 2013 by simple1

[fabianfred]

the Burmese military dictatorship (govt) makes war on all the citizens of the Burma, particularly the majority which are minorities, and even the most central Burmese were left to fend for themselves after Nargis. Kachin, Shan, Palaung, Karen...... even if they are Buddhist.... so no special treatment for Muslims.

Anyone arguing against helping those in need, whatever their requirements, ought to be ashamed of themselves.

We are all equally human and desire the same freedoms. Keep categorising people by religion or nationality and you only show your ignorance.

[crazygreg44]

Was wondering how many of the outraged humanitarian types posting on this subject have contributed to helping these people?

Like going to the camps that have been set up, helping to feed and clothe them, giving cash for their upkeep, offering to sponsor some of them.

Hands up all those who have given something other than words.

Didnt it say that there were 800k of these people still in Burma?

Thailand the great humanitarian country welcomes you, come on in. So then how many would be here?

'Stuff off we dont want you' seems a much more sensable approach.

years ago on the similan islands, I donated water and pineapples to 90 thirsty, half starved Rohyngias who were pushed back into the sea by the island's park rangers. One hour later we all watched in horror the Thai Navy arresting them. They treated them like they treat animals. Two weeks later the news confirmed they had pulled them out onto the open sea and left them without water, food, or any minor support, leaving them only two options: become shark food or die from dehydration. You have to answer me only one question: What sense does it make to grant Rohyniga a temporary relief, just to have them mass-culled at a later date, in a camouflaged genocide? So you think it is OK to feed them in front of cameras, only to kill them after the journalists went home ?

Edited January 31, 2013 by crazygreg44

[Ferangled]

It does puzzle me, why muslim refugees tend to seek refuge in non muslim countries.

Since when is Thailand a non Muslim country?! You need to get out more, I live near more Muslims than Buddhists on Phuket and strangely our village is bereft of the scams, muggings and murders that seem to effect every other area of Phuket. There's a very large Muslim population in the south actually and it's the 2nd largest religion in Thailand as a whole.

Yes Buddhism is by far the main religion here but given the treatment of these refugees I suggest we can only very loosely term Thailand as a Buddhist nation because quite clearly they pay only lip service to the faith.

[Mosha]

It does puzzle me, why muslim refugees tend to seek refuge in non muslim countries.

Since when is Thailand a non Muslim country?! You need to get out more, I live near more Muslims than Buddhists on Phuket and strangely our village is bereft of the scams, muggings and murders that seem to effect every other area of Phuket. There's a very large Muslim population in the south actually and it's the 2nd largest religion in Thailand as a whole.

Yes Buddhism is by far the main religion here but given the treatment of these refugees I suggest we can only very loosely term Thailand as a Buddhist nation because quite clearly they pay only lip service to the faith.

The country they fled from is the same is it not? So instead of criticising Thailand shouldn't the criticism be directed at Myanmar.

Edited February 1, 2013 by Mosha

[Ferangled]

It does puzzle me, why muslim refugees tend to seek refuge in non muslim countries.

Since when is Thailand a non Muslim country?! You need to get out more, I live near more Muslims than Buddhists on Phuket and strangely our village is bereft of the scams, muggings and murders that seem to effect every other area of Phuket. There's a very large Muslim population in the south actually and it's the 2nd largest religion in Thailand as a whole.

Yes Buddhism is by far the main religion here but given the treatment of these refugees I suggest we can only very loosely term Thailand as a Buddhist nation because quite clearly they pay only lip service to the faith.

The country they fled from is the same is it not? So instead of criticising Thailand shouldn't the criticism be directed at Myanmar.

Is Thailand treating them any better?

[lizardtongue]

Just a thought but I was woundering if their numbers are counted in the record busting tourist trade?

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been deleted, please stay on topic.

For the record, these people are not kept in open facilities. Outsiders do not have access to them.

[tomross46]

Let's be quite clear about one thing - this is a problem created by Myanmar. Why is nobody from the Thai government telling the Burmese to sort their own problems and stop pushing them onto their neighbours? Isn't this what ASEAN is for?

Perhaps there are more important considerations.

You are quite right about who created the problem but the Thai government won't act for a number of reasons.

This country needs Burmese workers to do the jobs that Thais are too lazy to do. There's Tavoy which Thai companies are falling over themselves to get a piece of the action. And ASEAN is toothless when it comes to human rights.

There was an article in the business section of the other paper a week or so ago about a Thai company (can't remember which one) looking for a few thousand Bangladeshi workers. Wouldn't the Rohingya fit the bill?

No they are too lazy and want to waste time praying 5 times a day to a non existent god

Your never ending bigotry is as dull as your thinking. Thailand will not accept stateless people as workers, so no chance for the Rohingya to obtain work in Thailand - perhaps as very low paid or basically slave labour

The Thai fishing industry is talking about bringing Bangladeshi to work on fishing boats in the Andaman sea, why not let the Rohingya work the boats?

If you look at the root cause of the problem, which started after WWI ll, when the British Colonials relinquished control of India, Pakistan, Burma and Malaysia, the state borders were set up by the British. Pakistan was West Pakistan and East Pakistan, one country divided by India. Now it is Pakistan and Bangladesh. These borders had nothing to do with ethnic groups or religion, but by colonial guidelines set up centuries before by the British.

[simple1]

The Thai fishing industry is talking about bringing Bangladeshi to work on fishing boats in the Andaman sea, why not let the Rohingya work the boats?

If you look at the root cause of the problem, which started after WWI ll, when the British Colonials relinquished control of India, Pakistan, Burma and Malaysia, the state borders were set up by the British. Pakistan was West Pakistan and East Pakistan, one country divided by India. Now it is Pakistan and Bangladesh. These borders had nothing to do with ethnic groups or religion, but by colonial guidelines set up centuries before by the British.

What has the Partition of India got to do with the current status of the Rohingya? The territory where they live was occupied by the Burmese in the late 1700s and still is Burmese sovereign territory.

Edited February 3, 2013 by simple1

[Buchholz]

Thailand pushes back 200 Rohingya boat people: navy

Today's version can be read as :

Thailand pushes back 145 Rohingya boat people: Police

Yesterday, in waters off the coast of Trang, marine police stopped a boatload of 145 Rohingya, including women and children.

They were given food and water and then pushed back out to sea.

.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Buchholz

[FarangTalk]

Let us not forget this policy was started by the Abhisit administration in 2009, when he was head of the National Security Council as well as PM.

http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/01/02/thailand-don-t-deport-rohingya-boat-people

[Buchholz]

Let us not forget this policy was started by the Abhisit administration in 2009, when he was head of the National Security Council as well as PM.

http://www.hrw.org/n...gya-boat-people

Then, let us really not forget this was begun even earlier... by an earlier PM :

Rohingyas are scattered over Bang­ladesh, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Ar­­abia, Thailand and the UAE. Refugee flows of the Muslim Rohingyas to Malaysia have risen since 2006, naturally attracted to a relatively close, prosperous and Muslim-majority Malaysia.

For years, Thai authorities had been lax about flows into Thailand, thinking that these Rohingyas were only “passing through” into Malaysia. But the former government of prime minister Samak Sundaravej tightened controls, and boatloads of refugees have since reportedly been towed into sea.

http://thestar.com.m...41439&sec=focus

[FarangTalk]

Let us not forget this policy was started by the Abhisit administration in 2009, when he was head of the National Security Council as well as PM.

http://www.hrw.org/n...gya-boat-people

Then, let us really not forget this was begun even earlier... by an earlier PM :

Rohingyas are scattered over Bang­ladesh, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Ar­­abia, Thailand and the UAE. Refugee flows of the Muslim Rohingyas to Malaysia have risen since 2006, naturally attracted to a relatively close, prosperous and Muslim-majority Malaysia.

For years, Thai authorities had been lax about flows into Thailand, thinking that these Rohingyas were only “passing through” into Malaysia. But the former government of prime minister Samak Sundaravej tightened controls, and boatloads of refugees have since reportedly been towed into sea.

http://thestar.com.m...41439&sec=focus

No doubt controls on immigrants tightened under Samak, however Abhisit as head of the National Security Council implemented the policy of towing the Rohingya boats to sea in 2009.

You can twist it anyway you want, Abhisit gave that order.

[Credo]

Abhisit then lied about towing them back out to sea.

[OzMick]

Let us not forget this policy was started by the Abhisit administration in 2009, when he was head of the National Security Council as well as PM.

http://www.hrw.org/n...gya-boat-people

Then, let us really not forget this was begun even earlier... by an earlier PM :

Rohingyas are scattered over Bang­ladesh, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Ar­­abia, Thailand and the UAE. Refugee flows of the Muslim Rohingyas to Malaysia have risen since 2006, naturally attracted to a relatively close, prosperous and Muslim-majority Malaysia.

For years, Thai authorities had been lax about flows into Thailand, thinking that these Rohingyas were only “passing through” into Malaysia. But the former government of prime minister Samak Sundaravej tightened controls, and boatloads of refugees have since reportedly been towed into sea.

http://thestar.com.m...41439&sec=focus

No doubt controls on immigrants tightened under Samak, however Abhisit as head of the National Security Council implemented the policy of towing the Rohingya boats to sea in 2009.

You can twist it anyway you want, Abhisit gave that order.

But that hardly equates to "started" does it? Would you like to correct your mis-statement to "continued the policy of previous governments"?

Edited February 4, 2013 by OzMick

[Buchholz]

Let us not forget this policy was started by the Abhisit administration in 2009, when he was head of the National Security Council as well as PM.

http://www.hrw.org/n...gya-boat-people

Then, let us really not forget this was begun even earlier... by an earlier PM :

Rohingyas are scattered over Bang­ladesh, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Ar­­abia, Thailand and the UAE. Refugee flows of the Muslim Rohingyas to Malaysia have risen since 2006, naturally attracted to a relatively close, prosperous and Muslim-majority Malaysia.

For years, Thai authorities had been lax about flows into Thailand, thinking that these Rohingyas were only “passing through” into Malaysia. But the former government of prime minister Samak Sundaravej tightened controls, and boatloads of refugees have since reportedly been towed into sea.

http://thestar.com.m...41439&sec=focus

No doubt controls on immigrants tightened under Samak, however Abhisit as head of the National Security Council implemented the policy of towing the Rohingya boats to sea in 2009.

You can twist it anyway you want, Abhisit gave that order.

And you flop about however you wish, but that order was preceded by Samak's same order in 2008.

Of course, what should also matter is.... that Yingluck is continuing it, as recently as yesterday, in 2013.

Hindsight doesn't seem to matter with the current administration.

.

.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Buchholz

[Ferangled]

Rather than trying to politicise the issue let's face it; the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments.

I believe that the reason Abhisit came under international scrutiny over this issue is that he actually made towing them to their death official policy, previously and indeed now although an accepted military or police response to the situation, it wasn't actually endorsed by the Government.

[Buchholz]

Rather than trying to politicise the issue let's face it; the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments.

I believe that the reason Abhisit came under international scrutiny over this issue is that he actually made towing them to their death official policy, previously and indeed now although an accepted military or police response to the situation, it wasn't actually endorsed by the Government.

Not really. It just became topical news at the time under Abhisit.... not unlike now under Yingluck who is coming under very similar international scrutiny.

Any action of the military and police response is accountable through whichever government was in charge at the time, be it Samak, Abhisit, or Yingluck.

Anything beyond that is an attempt to politicize the issue as your first paragraph agreeably describes...., before your second paragraph runs contrary to just that, political spinning it.

.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Buchholz

[Ferangled]

Rather than trying to politicise the issue let's face it; the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments.

I believe that the reason Abhisit came under international scrutiny over this issue is that he actually made towing them to their death official policy, previously and indeed now although an accepted military or police response to the situation, it wasn't actually endorsed by the Government.

Not really. It just became topical news at the time under Abhisit.... not unlike now under Yingluck who is coming under very similar international scrutiny.

Any action of the military and police response is accountable through whichever government was in charge at the time, be it Samak, Abhisit, or Yingluck.

Anything beyond that is an attempt to politicize the issue as your first paragraph agreeably describes...., before your second paragraph runs contrary to just that, political spinning it.

.

You're probably right, it was more likely down to his poor handling of the issue, inability to even acknowledge the incidents reported by the foreign press at the time and his callous, misguided comments about their plight and the reports of their treatment at the hands of the Thai military... AV certainly has a bizarre take on what constitutes violating "human rights"...

"Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva insisted Tuesday that Thailand had respected the rights of boat people from Burma, saying reports that the migrants were mistreated and abandoned at sea were “exaggerated”.

Mr Abhisit also said that foreign tourists who reportedly witnessed the incidents may have misunderstood what the Thai army and navy were trying to do with the immigrants.

Survivors and a human rights group have accused the Thai military of detaining and beating up to 1,000 members of the Rohingya minority from Burma late last year, before towing them out to sea with little food and water.

“The government will take action against illegal immigrants. If too many of them come, it will affect the country’s security. However, the actions will not violate human rights,” Abhisit told reporters.

He said the issue of human trafficking networks should be addressed with neighbouring countries, and blamed the migrants for getting into distress on purpose as a tactic to get into third countries.

“Sometimes they sail on boats without engines or sink their ships so that authorities help them to get onshore,” Abhisit said.

“Sometimes the information is exaggerated. Reports said (military actions) were witnessed by tourists — it may be a misunderstanding by tourists.”

Witnesses have reportedly said that some of the detainees were beaten within metres of foreign tourists on a remote Thai island off the coast, while photos have shown scores of migrants tied up on a beach"

http://asiancorrespo...-the-rohingyas/

I maintain my original statement is correct; "the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments"...

Edited February 7, 2013 by Ferangled

[rixalex]

You're probably right, it was more likely down to his poor handling of the issue, inability to even acknowledge the incidents reported by the foreign press at the time and his callous, misguided comments about their plight and the reports of their treatment at the hands of the Thai military... AV certainly has a bizarre take on what constitutes violating "human rights"...

"Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva insisted Tuesday that Thailand had respected the rights of boat people from Burma, saying reports that the migrants were mistreated and abandoned at sea were “exaggerated”.

Mr Abhisit also said that foreign tourists who reportedly witnessed the incidents may have misunderstood what the Thai army and navy were trying to do with the immigrants.

Survivors and a human rights group have accused the Thai military of detaining and beating up to 1,000 members of the Rohingya minority from Burma late last year, before towing them out to sea with little food and water.

“The government will take action against illegal immigrants. If too many of them come, it will affect the country’s security. However, the actions will not violate human rights,” Abhisit told reporters.

He said the issue of human trafficking networks should be addressed with neighbouring countries, and blamed the migrants for getting into distress on purpose as a tactic to get into third countries.

“Sometimes they sail on boats without engines or sink their ships so that authorities help them to get onshore,” Abhisit said.

“Sometimes the information is exaggerated. Reports said (military actions) were witnessed by tourists — it may be a misunderstanding by tourists.”

Witnesses have reportedly said that some of the detainees were beaten within metres of foreign tourists on a remote Thai island off the coast, while photos have shown scores of migrants tied up on a beach"

http://asiancorrespo...-the-rohingyas/

I maintain my original statement is correct; "the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments"...

What you are maintaining is your hypocritical attitude of, on the one hand, urging there be no politicising of the issue, and on the other, seeking to prove that Abhisit's dealing of the issue was somehow different, somehow worse.

[Buchholz]

Rather than trying to politicise the issue let's face it; the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments.

I believe that the reason Abhisit came under international scrutiny over this issue is that he actually made towing them to their death official policy, previously and indeed now although an accepted military or police response to the situation, it wasn't actually endorsed by the Government.

Not really. It just became topical news at the time under Abhisit.... not unlike now under Yingluck who is coming under very similar international scrutiny.

Any action of the military and police response is accountable through whichever government was in charge at the time, be it Samak, Abhisit, or Yingluck.

Anything beyond that is an attempt to politicize the issue as your first paragraph agreeably describes...., before your second paragraph runs contrary to just that, political spinning it.

.

You're probably right, it was more likely down to his poor handling of the issue, inability to even acknowledge the incidents reported by the foreign press at the time and his callous, misguided comments about their plight and the reports of their treatment at the hands of the Thai military...

The same as what occurred under Samak and Somchai and what continues to occur with Yingluck.

I maintain my original statement is correct; "the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments"...

And as said before, that is agreeably accurate, hence no need to attempt to focus on one being any different than another.... but yet, you continue.

.

Edited February 7, 2013 by Buchholz

[rixalex]

Can't also help wondering how many of those now urging the issue not be politicised, were the exact same people shouting the loudest against the government and attempting as much political point scoring as possible, when the last government were overseeing the matter. Now we have a government they approve of and suddenly it dawns on them that actually, it's really not fair to blame the PM. How terribly convenient...

[Ferangled]

The lady doth protest too much, methinks...

However you guys try to spin it Abhisit's name is intrinsically linked to inhumane treatment of the Rohingya and he is remembered for his deliberate and callous words on the issue during his short tenure as PM. As I clearly state I believe that the handling of the issue has been terrible under successive Governments but I understand why it's AV's name that springs to the fore over the issue; because he handled the reported incidents under his watch particularly dreadfully. To bounce from that to issuing live fire orders against his own people one has to question his morality and personal take on what constitutes the violation of human rights...

Will Yingluck do the same? Let's wait and see shall we, not a promising start but her comments fall short of Abhisit's own cold hearted, squirming tosh. The fact is she is still PM and actually has a chance to change public perception of how badly Thailand are handling this and other human rights issues and hopefully shift the current perception of Thais as deeply racist and xenophobic people. It's clear that you both hope that she doesn't resolve the issue and a crying shame that political point scoring is more important to many than actually resolving the plight of these people.

Perhaps if previous Governments had actually been brought to task for their criminal handling of the Rohingya Yingluck's Government might actually feel some real pressure to resolve the issue? As it is history shows us that the Thai people really couldn't care less about them and the Government will lose no support by towing boatloads of them to their death...

Perhaps if the people of Thailand spent less time worrying about foreigners using Buddhist images in advertising and more about the gross perversions of the Buddhist faith within Thailand, the people as a whole would actually start to grow and feel some affinity for their fellow human beings, not simply dismiss them as illegal Muslim immigrants with no rights.

Please continue to spin away...

[FarangTalk]

And you flop about however you wish, but that order was preceded by Samak's same order in 2008.

That is incorrect.

I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse or just dishonest, but the order to tow boats out to sea was given by Abhisit as head of the National Security Council in 2009.

Samak tightened controls on immigration but did not give orders for the boats to be towed out to sea.

[Buchholz]

However you guys try to spin it Abhisit's name is intrinsically linked to inhumane treatment of the Rohingya and he is remembered for his deliberate and callous words on the issue during his short tenure as PM. As I clearly state I believe that the handling of the issue has been terrible under successive Governments but I understand why it's AV's name that springs to the fore over the issue

The spinning going on are your repeated disingenuous statements:

Rather than trying to politicise the issue let's face it; the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments.

and then

I maintain my original statement is correct; "the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments"...

Both of which you promptly hypocritically spin away from in subsequent comments by attempting to focus it on a particular Thai government.

The only "springing to mind" of Abhisit's name on this issue comes from those that wish to discount the preceding and succeeding administrations, who were no better and were no less "dreadful" in their words and actions towards the Rohingya, or other similar groups like the Hmong.

Quite why you struggle to unequivocally castigate ALL administrations for their equally dreadful actions and leave it at that is perplexing... unless one considers it an attempt to specifically politicize the issue by attempting to focus on only one and downplaying the other three.

.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

And you flop about however you wish, but that order was preceded by Samak's same order in 2008.

That is incorrect.

Samak tightened controls on immigration but did not give orders for the boats to be towed out to sea.

I should have specified similar, not precisely the same, order but one no less "dreadful."

Samak's solution was to tow them to a deserted island, where quote:

"To stop the influx, we have to keep them in a tough place. Those who are about to follow will have to know life here will be difficult in order that they won't sneak in."

In regards to the specificity of towing them back out to sea, it's noteworthy that that policy continues through to the Yingluck administration as recently as last week, despite all the negative fallout that justifiably occurred from that particular action in the preceding Abhisit government.

2013-02-04

Thailand pushes back 145 Rohingya boat people: Police

Yesterday, in waters off the coast of Trang, marine police stopped a boatload of 145 Rohingya, including women and children.

They were given food and water and then pushed back out to sea.

[rixalex]

It's clear that you both hope that she doesn't resolve the issue and a crying shame that political point scoring is more important to many than actually resolving the plight of these people.

Implicit in that statement about hoping that she doesn't resolve the issue (wrong as far as a representation of my views is concerned), is the fact that it is indeed in her power to resolve the issue. If she doesn't, she will be criticised for it, and with justification, just as Abhisit was, and just as the other PMs that came before him were. Trying to in some way muzzle criticism by labelling those who do as callous political point scorers who don't care for the plight of these people, is nothing but a sad attempt to shield the PM and the government from blame... and not only is it sad, it's extremely hypocritical when the people attempting this muzzling are the same people who were most vocal against Abhisit with regards this issue.

[Ferangled]

It's clear that you both hope that she doesn't resolve the issue and a crying shame that political point scoring is more important to many than actually resolving the plight of these people.

Implicit in that statement about hoping that she doesn't resolve the issue (wrong as far as a representation of my views is concerned), is the fact that it is indeed in her power to resolve the issue. If she doesn't, she will be criticised for it, and with justification, just as Abhisit was, and just as the other PMs that came before him were. Trying to in some way muzzle criticism by labelling those who do as callous political point scorers who don't care for the plight of these people, is nothing but a sad attempt to shield the PM and the government from blame... and not only is it sad, it's extremely hypocritical when the people attempting this muzzling are the same people who were most vocal against Abhisit with regards this issue.

Total BS. Yingluck actually still has a chance to intact change on this issue positively (unlikely though given past history) but you have already decided she won't and are criticising her for handling the situation as badly as her predecessor! We can definitively comment on previous PM's handling of the issue as their tenure is actually over... we already know exactly how they handled the issue! A minor distinction for some I know...

I have stated quite clearly that I think the treatment of these people by various Governments, up to this point the current included, has been terrible. That doesn't change the fact that, IMHO, Abhisit is clearly the one who handled the issue in the most callous, xenophobic and insensitive manner; He is the only PM that I am aware of that actually made towing people to sea and leaving them for dead policy!

There's no defending any inaction on the part of the current Government and I certainly haven't tried to but inaction does not equate to deliberate and calculated orders to contravene human rights. My personal opinion is that all have failed on this issue but if pressed, as I have been by your comments, Abhisit stands out for his particularly terrible handling of the situation.