Aung San Suu Kyi.. The Fall of a Human Rights Icon..

[Quantum Quack]

this is added to by the need to hammer the nail harder to create a factualised sense of achievement.
in this case less is more.
oxy and various other things reduces oxygen to the brain. over longer periods this reduces the emotional containment of thought processes to drive a need for shorter resolutions.
this drives the super ego & ego
letting go of something that is needed to attain self actualization is EXTREMELY difficult.
your sense of injury is probably compounded issues.

when someone responds emotively, if you choose to pick up the same baton and run with it, it will weigh you down in one direction.
left, right, forward, backward....
not being totally conscious of that results in you bending off into a different direction.

well said, as I understand it..
true, normally I would not take an activist role but there are other things at play that require it.

I do have people following this thread, vulnerable people, who are faced with such trauma and despair, only amplified by the severely ignorant and extremely abusive ranting of an obsessed moderator.

They are incensed by the irresponsibility of Bells posts.
They are angry that Bells is allowed by sciforums to post against any rules of respectful conversation.
If legal action were feasible they would take it. (still possible I might add)
The days of hates speech wrapped up in ad hominen with impunity are coming to an end. Digital monitoring affords adequate surveillance for such things as you know doubt have read in the media.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

They are angry that Bells is allowed by sciforums to post against any rules of respectful conversation.
If legal action were feasible they would take it.

sometimes, when there is soo much wrong in the world/country/religion/culture and many of those things are unable to be stopped[the feeling of helplessness is exasperated & heightened] there is a driving force in humans to seek to bring about great change in any possible avenue.

we see this in sweeping bloody revolutions, where one group of dictators have been replaced with another single dictator or visa versa etc.

you also see it in other forms where pretend judicial systems of supposed secular mediation(non religious persecution ideological regulation systems) then hand their findings to a religious fascist who has divine authority over it.

having studied domestic violence extensively & for many years
i refer you to ponder on the concept of an aggrieved friend of the(a) victim.

sometimes the relationship to set right the perception becomes the intrinsic bond of the friendship as a proxy bond to moral or emotional shared morality.

once you take on their sense of injury and seek to compound that with your own sense of injury, it produces a situation that is unable to be put back into a pre condition 100%.
in situations of abuse, this sets up an addiction to saddism
the need to continually inflict suffering on others.
this is what drives capital punishment and revenge(the need to inflict justice).
it is a never ending cycle of bloody violence against the human psyche.

 

[Quantum Quack]

sometimes, when there is soo much wrong in the world/country/religion/culture and many of those things are unable to be stopped[the feeling of helplessness is exasperated & heightened] there is a driving force in humans to seek to bring about great change in any possible avenue.

Oh I understand your point well and it is a good point to make.. Hysteria in the face of such extremes is not uncommon, and to be expected. This is why humans have developed systems to investigate thoroughly before rushing to judgement. Before acting impulsively leading to even further despair and tragedy.

However in the case of Myanmar there are solutions but only if the persons pointing their blaming finger find out what to point at.
The main reason for entertaining this thread was to suggest that the responsibility for the atrocities in Myanmar needs clear headed, non-hysterical consideration. It is hard to do when the world is in outrage and even harder to fight against the propaganda, once established in the mindset of those who like to listen to gossip and not facts.

There are solutions to the Rohingya crisis and there are global solutions that empower Suu in her quest for a unified nation. But as the world considers her to be complicit in genocide the world can not assist in a solution.

Such is the nature of propaganda...
More time spent refuting the lies and delusions than actually working on the solutions....

 

[RainbowSingularity]

Oh I understand your point well and it is a good point to make.. Hysteria in the face of such extremes is not uncommon, and to be expected. This is why humans have developed systems to investigate thoroughly before rushing to judgement. Before acting impulsively leading to even further despair and tragedy.

However in the case of Myanmar there are solutions but only if the persons pointing their blaming finger find out what to point at.
The main reason for entertaining this thread was to suggest that the responsibility for the atrocities in Myanmar needs clear headed, non-hysterical consideration. It is hard to do when the world is in outrage and even harder to fight against the propaganda, once established in the mindset of those who like to listen to gossip and not facts.

There are solutions to the Rohingya crisis and there are global solutions that empower Suu in her quest for a unified nation. But as the world considers her to be complicit in genocide the world can not assist in a solution.

Such is the nature of propaganda...
More time spent refuting the lies and delusions than actually working on the solutions....

i too worry that Suu is as much a hostage of tyranny as a media piece for mediocrity
what i am keenly aware of is also several other aspects.
religion has no real base line when territorial borders are being usurped in the face of profit & loss(physical, perceptual or ideological).
large undocumented unregulated semi autonomous populations inside national borders declaring the protections of that countrys afforded tax paying moral codes is problematic.
pop-science-popular-media-click-bait of forced migration concepts pander to extremists desires to whip up hatred among the more civilized conciliatory to fan the flames of violence and anarchy.

mass hysteria is used as an excuse for lynching minority's
we saw this spread like a plague in india recently. meanwhile it probably continues to live on among many societys in lesser published forms

actually working on the solutions....

forced labour or forced aid ?
it seems the global opinion is split between the 2 opposites.

who and why was the trade embargoes lifted on them ?
who is making all the money ?
surely paying lip service to pretend democracy is not equal to the mechanisms that drive the purpose of the embargoes ?

 

[Quantum Quack]

One small step - a possible solution
The corrupted military still have power over the Rohingya in the Bangladesh camp.
Only if the Rohingya wish to gain citizenship in Myanmar.
By dis-empowering the military and removing their power over the Rohingya by granting them international citizenship that does not prejudice their claims in Myanmar, one can then form a more sustainable solution.

All persons seeking Asylum - world wide
By granting international citizenship to all persons seeking to annul or denounce their current citizenship we avoid the problem of an asylum seeker being held "hostage" by their citizenship to a country that they are seeking asylum from. We also prevent a nation who is processing the request for asylum from force-ably deporting that seeker back to a place of persecution. ( as they are no longer citizens of that nation)
Thus the asylum seeker who has international citizenship only, becomes a genuine asylum seeker with out any enforced citizenship of a country that is persecuting them.

By granting the Rohingya international citizenship their quest for asylum in Bangladesh becomes tangible. They are international citizens, documented and protected under international human rights law and not encumbered by the human rights laws of the nation they have escaped from and until granted asylum they are not encumbered by the Human rights laws of the host nation either.
They would also have access to a valid UN International passport that would allow mobility under international law. ( I want one! )
They are thus afforded proper protection, with out confusion by the United Nations, in particular the UNHRC.

Once the issue of citizenship is no longer like bait on a hook the Myanmar Military advantage weakens because the Rohingya are no longer stateless and are indeed a part of the international community and any attack on the Rohingya is clearly and unambiguously an attack on the international community.

Once established the rest of the solution over time will become more obvious.

 

[Quantum Quack]

i too worry that Suu is as much a hostage of tyranny as a media piece for mediocrity
what i am keenly aware of is also several other aspects.
religion has no real base line when territorial borders are being usurped in the face of profit & loss(physical, perceptual or ideological).
large undocumented unregulated semi autonomous populations inside national borders declaring the protections of that countrys afforded tax paying moral codes is problematic.
pop-science-popular-media-click-bait of forced migration concepts pander to extremists desires to whip up hatred among the more civilized conciliatory to fan the flames of violence and anarchy.

mass hysteria is used as an excuse for lynching minority's
we saw this spread like a plague in india recently. meanwhile it probably continues to live on among many societys in lesser published forms



forced labour or forced aid ?
it seems the global opinion is split between the 2 opposites.

who and why was the trade embargoes lifted on them ?
who is making all the money ?
surely paying lip service to pretend democracy is not equal to the mechanisms that drive the purpose of the embargoes ?

The situation in Myanmar has no real comparison any where in the world.
It is a profoundly disturbing place, with gross human rights abuses systemically endemic through out the nation.
Fueled primarily by extreme poverty of most being sustained by the pittance that the drug producers give them for their labor.
Incredible abuse is being perpetrated right now as the world points it's blame finger in the wrong direction.

There is only one place that I am aware of that could be considered worse ( if you ever thought that possible) and that will remain confidential until more evidence has been revealed.

 

[Quantum Quack]

A media report released : 26-04-2018 ( in part)


UN press Briefing - Office for the spokesperson for the Secretary general.

Keeping on the subject of Myanmar, an update from our humanitarian colleagues on Myanmar, as the Security Council, as you know, is now on his way to the country. Our humanitarian colleagues tell us that the situation in Rakhine State remains extremely concerning. There are continued reports of departures from northern Rakhine, and some reports of threats and extortion against Muslim communities. Bulldozing of burned or abandoned villages remains evident, and the movement restrictions placed on Rohingya communities remain in place, including for those trapped in camps for the last six years in central Rakhine. There is a population of around 500,000 Rohingya still living in Rakhine who face continued discrimination and marginalization. Severe restrictions on their freedom of movement persist, grossly restricting their access to health care, education and livelihoods. Therefore, our humanitarian colleagues stress that refugees from Bangladesh cannot be expected to safely, voluntarily and sustainably return. The United Nations stands ready to work with the Government of Myanmar in implementing the recommendations of the Rakhine Advisory Commission.
​

Notice the area I bolded.

What conclusions can you make about the UN's feelings about the Myanmar Government in Particular Suu?

=============================================

The actual recommendations of the Rakhine Advisory Commission referred to in the press briefing. Launched 24th, August 2017

After one year of consultations held across Rakhine State and in other parts of the country and the region, the Advisory Commission submitted its final report to national authorities on 23 August. The report recommends urgent and sustained action on a number of fronts to prevent violence, maintain peace, foster reconciliation and offer a sense of hope to the State’s hard-pressed population.

The final report of the Advisory Commission chaired by Kofi Annan puts forward recommendations to surmount the political, socio-economic and humanitarian challenges that currently face Rakhine State. It builds on the Commission’s interim report released in March of this year.

“Unless concerted action – led by the government and aided by all sectors of the government and society – is taken soon, we risk the return of another cycle of violence and radicalisation, which will further deepen the chronic poverty that afflicts Rakhine State”, said Kofi Annan, Chair of the Advisory Commission on Rakhine State.

The final report addresses in depth a broad range of structural issues that are impediments to the peace and prosperity of Rakhine State. Several recommendations focus specifically on citizenship verification, rights and equality before the law, documentation, the situation of the internally displaced and freedom of movement, which affect the Muslim population disproportionally. An overview of the thematic focus areas of the report and its recommendations can be found below.

The report is the outcome of over 150 consultations and meetings held by the Advisory Commission since its launch in September 2016. Commission members have travelled extensively throughout Rakhine State, and held meetings in Yangon and Naypyitaw, Indonesia, Thailand, Bangladesh, and Geneva.

“The Commission has put forward honest and constructive recommendations which we know will create debate,” Commission Chair Kofi Annan said. “However, if adopted and implemented in the spirit in which they were conceived, I firmly believe that our recommendations, along with those of our interim report, can trace a path to lasting peace, development and respect for the rule of law in Rakhine State.”

With the submission of its final report, the Advisory Commission on Rakhine has completed its mandate. However, the Commission’s report recommends a national mechanism be established to ensure the effective implementation of its recommendations.

“We propose a ministerial-level appointment to be made with the sole function of coordinating policy on Rakhine State and ensuring the effective implementation of the Rakhine Advisory Commission’s recommendations,” says Commission Chair Kofi Annan. “The appointee should be supported by a permanent and well-staffed secretariat, which will be an integral part of the Central Committee on Implementation of Peace and Development in Rakhine State and support its work.”
​

Security Council Press release: 9th, May 2018 ( in part )

In Myanmar, the members of the Security Council met State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, Union Minister for the State Counsellor’s Office U Kyaw Tint Swe, Union Minister for Office of the Union Government and National Security Adviser U Thaung Tun, Union Minister for Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement Win Myat Aye, and other senior Government officials, representatives of the United Nations country team in Myanmar and members of civil society. They also visited northern Rakhine state and observed the situation in northern Rakhine State, including widespread destruction of villages, as well as reception centres and transit camps under preparation by the Government of Myanmar.
​

Note the area I have bolded...

What can you infer about the state of security and ethnic acceptance for the repatriation of the Rohingya?
What can you infer about the efforts of Suu and her Government to achieve a positive result in Myanmar regarding the Rohingya?

​

 

[Bells]

One small step - a possible solution
The corrupted military still have power over the Rohingya in the Bangladesh camp.
Only if the Rohingya wish to gain citizenship in Myanmar.
By dis-empowering the military and removing their power over the Rohingya by granting them international citizenship that does not prejudice their claims in Myanmar, one can then form a more sustainable solution.

All persons seeking Asylum - world wide
By granting international citizenship to all persons seeking to annul or denounce their current citizenship we avoid the problem of an asylum seeker being held "hostage" by their citizenship to a country that they are seeking asylum from. We also prevent a nation who is processing the request for asylum from force-ably deporting that seeker back to a place of persecution. ( as they are no longer citizens of that nation)
Thus the asylum seeker who has international citizenship only, becomes a genuine asylum seeker with out any enforced citizenship of a country that is persecuting them.

By granting the Rohingya international citizenship their quest for asylum in Bangladesh becomes tangible. They are international citizens, documented and protected under international human rights law and not encumbered by the human rights laws of the nation they have escaped from and until granted asylum they are not encumbered by the Human rights laws of the host nation either.
They would also have access to a valid UN International passport that would allow mobility under international law. ( I want one! )
They are thus afforded proper protection, with out confusion by the United Nations, in particular the UNHRC.

Once the issue of citizenship is no longer like bait on a hook the Myanmar Military advantage weakens because the Rohingya are no longer stateless and are indeed a part of the international community and any attack on the Rohingya is clearly and unambiguously an attack on the international community.

Once established the rest of the solution over time will become more obvious.

Then they can never return home.

You are literally arguing for rewarding genocidal behaviour and ethnic cleansing.

Secondly, there is no such thing as "international citizenship".

Not in the sense that you are proposing.

The Rohingya want to return home. They are Burmese. Myanmar is their home.

Your fanciful solution would literally renege their claim on their Burmese citizenship and Myanmar will never allow them to return home.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Progress in Myanmar:

UNITED NATIONS, Feb. 13 (Xinhua) -- Problems remain in Myanmar's Rakhine State despite progress in certain areas, a UN official told the Security Council on Tuesday.

The priorities laid out by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, which include the end of violence, humanitarian access, and return of refugees from Bangladesh, have not been entirely implemented five months after the start of violence in Rakhine, said Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs Miroslav Jenca.

The outflow of Rohingya people from Rakhine State continues, although at a lower rate, said Jenca. As of Feb. 5, between 1,000 and 1,200 people were reportedly waiting on a beach in Maungdaw, planning to leave for Bangladesh. So far, 688,000 Rohingyas have fled, said Jenca.
src: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-02/14/c_136976303.htm (cred: 8/10)

Click the above link for the full report.

The date of this report is obscure and I am currently researching to confirm it.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Then they can never return home.

You are literally arguing for rewarding genocidal behaviour and ethnic cleansing.

Secondly, there is no such thing as "international citizenship".

Not in the sense that you are proposing.

The Rohingya want to return home. They are Burmese. Myanmar is their home.

Your fanciful solution would literally renege their claim on their Burmese citizenship and Myanmar will never allow them to return home.

Not at all, just dealing with the reality of their situation.
There have been many televised interviews showing that the Rohingya are not happy about repatriation until the legal and security issues are resolved.
As it stands they have no home to return to. They are stateless.
Bangladesh is currently building island camps to which they may force the asylum seekers to move to. ( common knowledge )

They will be able to return only after the appropriate legal and security issues are addressed. Not before.
By granting them international citizenry the hold that the military have is weakened. There ability to fight for their rights is strengthened.
Because as it is they are stateless and have very little power in their situation.
By formally making them members of this planet they would acquire certain rights that are currently being denied them. They currently have to beg for their rights. As an international citizen they would be legally entitled to their rights.
Until you are prepared to deal with this legal and security issue you will be just waving your hands around saying nothing worth while.

 

[Quantum Quack]

The latest relevant report from the UN I have found ( Public published 28th Feb 2019) (in part)

Crisis in Rakhine State, Violence Could Derail Gains in Myanmar’s Peace Process, Special Envoy Warns Security Council, Calling for Unimpeded Humanitarian Access

Fragility, tensions and violence in Myanmar — including, but not limited to, the recent crisis in Rakhine State — risk jeopardizing important strides made in that country’s peace process, the top United Nations official in Myanmar warned the Security Council today, urging the 15-member organ to continue to lend support.


“While Bangladesh and host communities have been very generous, we cannot expect this to continue indefinitely,” said Christine Schraner Burgener, the Secretary-General’s Special Envoy, referring to the hundreds of thousands of Rohingya refugees who fled across the border from Myanmar 18 months ago. While refugees continue to live in extremely challenging conditions with few signs of hope, she added that military and civilian tensions persist in Myanmar ahead of general elections in 2020. Peace remains fragile as the country continues to wrestle with the legacy of decades of military rule and fundamental human rights issues.

 

[Bells]

What can you infer about the state of security and ethnic acceptance for the repatriation of the Rohingya?
What can you infer about the efforts of Suu and her Government to achieve a positive result in Myanmar regarding the Rohingya?

And since then, the UN released its findings.

Which has been linked multiple times now.

Given Myanmar cracked down on the Rohingya after the Commission's recommendations were released and given Aung San Suu Kyi openly rejected its findings, what exactly is the point of your linking it and ignoring everything that came after it?

Progress in Myanmar:

UNITED NATIONS, Feb. 13 (Xinhua) -- Problems remain in Myanmar's Rakhine State despite progress in certain areas, a UN official told the Security Council on Tuesday.

The priorities laid out by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, which include the end of violence, humanitarian access, and return of refugees from Bangladesh, have not been entirely implemented five months after the start of violence in Rakhine, said Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs Miroslav Jenca.

The outflow of Rohingya people from Rakhine State continues, although at a lower rate, said Jenca. As of Feb. 5, between 1,000 and 1,200 people were reportedly waiting on a beach in Maungdaw, planning to leave for Bangladesh. So far, 688,000 Rohingyas have fled, said Jenca.
src: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-02/14/c_136976303.htm (cred: 8/10)

Click the above link for the full report.

Which is from over a year ago.

We are in 2019.

Not at all, just dealing with the reality of their situation.
There have been many televised interviews showing that the Rohingya are not happy about repatriation until the legal and security issues are resolved.
As it stands they have no home to return to. They are stateless.

They will remain stateless under your proposition (which does not even exist in real life).

They do have homes to return to. Aung San Suu Kyi needs to reinstate their citizenship.

They will be able to return only after the appropriate legal and security issues are addressed. Not before.

Stripping them of their citizenship is why the Burmese State can feel empowered to commit genocide. There are cycles and steps that occur with ethnic cleansing.

It is a particular pattern that is followed. Stripping people of their citizenship is but one of those steps that occur before ethnic cleansing and genocide. And the reason being that they are no longer protected by the laws of the State (among various other reasons). Citizens may have recourse in the courts against the State. Non-citizens do not.

So your solution will make their situation worse.

By granting them international citizenry the hold that the military have is weakened. There ability to fight for their rights is strengthened.

And why is that?

Myanmar has laws for its citizens. By forcing the Rohingya to no longer by Burmese and to become "international citizens" (which again, DOES NOT EXIST), they are no longer protected in Myanmar. Do you understand now?

Because as it is they are stateless and have very little power in their situation.

And do you think creating a new form of citizenship and giving them a passport will somehow or other make the Burmese military bomb them less?

Declaring a genocide is the only way to stop the military. Because declaring a genocide sets into motion, protection for the Rohingya. It entails arresting the members of the military and civilian government who participated in this genocide and thus, removing from power, those who commit acts of genocide.

Do you understand now?

Your fanciful solution which has no basis in reality (because once again, "international citizenship" does not actually exist and no country can be forced to recognise it if it was newly created without every country voting to recognising it and then enacting laws in their own respective countries to recognise it - are you that naive to think that a Government that has committed acts of genocide would vote for such a measure?), would further strip the Rohingya of their rights in Burma - including right of return to their homeland.

By formally making them members of this planet they acquire certain rights that are currently being denied them. They currently have to beg for their rights. As an international citizen they would be legally entitled to their rights.

Again, there is no such thing as an "international citizen".

For there to be such a thing, the UN would have to vote on it and that would include Myanmar voting for it to create it.

It would then have to be ratified in each member state who signed up to accept it - because accepting it would essentially mean open borders.

Now, take a moment.. You may need more than a moment.. But try..

Do you really think Myanmar would create a law to ratify the recognition of "international citizenship", which you think will then give the Rohingya rights in Myanmar?

Just think about it.

Try. Hard.

Until you are prepared to deal with this legal and security issue you will be just waving your hands around saying nothing worth while.

I am dealing with reality.

You are dealing with the unicorns and fairies at the bottom of the garden.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Given Myanmar cracked down on the Rohingya after the Commission's recommendations were released and given Aung San Suu Kyi openly rejected its findings, what exactly is the point of your linking it and ignoring everything that came after it?

Didn't Suu commission that report?
And what crack down are you referring to link please...with date

They will remain stateless under your proposition (which does not even exist in real life).

no they won't. They would become world citizens, with pass ports and identity records.

And of course it doesn't exist as a system yet... something on the table for now waiting for the time and resolve.

Stripping them of their citizenship is why the Burmese State can feel empowered to commit genocide. There are cycles and steps that occur with ethnic cleansing.

If they were given international citizenship after they were stripped of their Rohingya citizenship, then the international community is being attacked...and could respond legally and immediately. Under international law.
Why is that so hard to understand?

Again, there is no such thing as an "international citizen".

For there to be such a thing, the UN would have to vote on it and that would include Myanmar voting for it to create it.

It would then have to be ratified in each member state who signed up to accept it - because accepting it would essentially mean open borders.

Now, take a moment.. You may need more than a moment.. But try..

Do you really think Myanmar would create a law to ratify the recognition of "international citizenship", which you think will then give the Rohingya rights in Myanmar?

Just think about it.

Try. Hard.

As it stands the international community has to respect Myanmar's sovereignty. But if the attacks occur on international citizens then the international community has the right and power to step in.

And before you repeat yourself, of course it is only a proposition on the table for future development.

well at least I see you have already started to develop the idea... well done!

I am dealing with reality.

You are dealing with the unicorns and fairies at the bottom of the garden.

ad hominem!

Only because you are working from ignorance and prepared to judge before you actually know what it is you are judging. Not my fault... yours.

 

[Quantum Quack]

If you want to do some actual research see:
Global citizenship for a start.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_citizenship

The idea can be dated back to as early as 412bc
The principle I am working to is:

No person shall ever be stateless.

 

[Bells]

Didn't Suu commission that report?

Of sorts.

And she basically rejected its findings anyway.

And what crack down are you referring to link please...with date

It has already been linked. And you claimed to have read that report "ages ago".

Because it's all in there.

Why are you asking for something that has been linked multiple times, which you claimed to have read it in its entirety "ages ago", while still refusing and failing to support any of your arguments and claims that there is no genocide, that it is merely an "eviction" of the Rohingya, that the genocide is fake, and it is all perpetrated by drug cartels, apparently from Mexico becoming involved in the "golden triangle"?

no they won't. They would become world citizens, with pass ports and identity records.

And of course it doesn't exist as a system yet... something on the table for now waiting for the time and resolve.

Once again.

Pay attention now.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A WORLD CITIZEN.

Do you understand now?

Secondly, Burma and the Government there have clearly stated that their laws only apply to Burmese citizens. Which is why they stripped the Rohingya of their citizenship years ago.

So your proposal that somehow or other, "world citizenship" or however else you are trying to call it, will still not ensure that they are protected in Myanmar and it will only mean that they give up their biggest claim - which is their Burmese citizenship.

It is why the Advisory Commission, which you liked, advised as a point in its main findings, the issue of citizenship.

Not "world citizenship" or "international citizenship" - none of which even exists - but Burmese citizenship.

The Rohingya were stripped of their citizenship.

Here is the thing with genocide, and this has been covered several times now in this thread. One of the steps of genocide, a process of it, is to strip them of citizenship or personhood and dehumanise them.

All of which has happened in Myanmar. This genocide has been in the works for a very long time. It is a slow genocide, if you will. The violence we saw erupt in 2017, is but one incident.

But it is still part of a broader genocide and ethnic cleansing.

So when the Advisory Commission recommended that the Rohingya be given pathway back to citizenship, Aunt San Suu Kyi basically disregarded the entire thing and set up a new commissions.. The result was predictable.

And of course it doesn't exist as a system yet... something on the table for now waiting for the time and resolve.

Do you understand that Myanmar would have to vote to agree to this as well, right?

And that the Burmese Muslims would still effectively be stateless.

The world is not a "State".

If they were given international citizenship after they were stripped of their Rohingya citizenship, then the international community is being attacked...and could respond legally and immediately. Under international law.
Why is that so hard to understand?

What is so hard to understand about something that does not actually exist outside of your head?

You are really asking this question?

As it stands the international community has to respect Myanmar's sovereignty. But if the attacks occur on international citizens then the international community has the right and power to step in.

Again.

THIS DOES NOT EXIST

Secondly, if they were an "international citizen", then that would mean Myanmar as well, the country that is committing genocide against them.

Understand now?

And before you repeat yourself, of course it is only a proposition on the table for future development.

Ya. In your head.

Unless you think every country on Earth will abolish its borders and declare everyone to be an "international citizen", then frankly, you are simply wasting our time and again, trolling.

And I am still waiting for you to back up your claims that it is not a genocide, that it is being faked by Mexican drug cartels and the military, that the Rohingya being merely "evicted".

Stop trolling. Stop dodging.

Back up your claims.

well at least I see you have already started to develop the idea... well done!

There is no idea to develop.

No country would do it.

ad hominem!

Only because you are working from ignorance and prepared to judge before you actually know what it is you are judging. Not my fault... yours.

Stop dealing in fantasy.

Start dealing with facts.

Support your claims, as requested numerous times now. Otherwise I will treat you like a troll.

 

[Bells]

If you want to do some actual research see:
Global citizenship for a start.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_citizenship

The idea can be dated back to as early as 412bc
The principle I am working to is:

No person shall ever be stateless.

And if you were the leader of the world, then sure..

But you are not.

And you clearly have not read your own link.

To have "global citizenship", it would require the world to basically exist without borders.

Look at the EU as a prime example. Member states can essentially travel to other member states without requiring visa's, for example. And each member has their own laws and citizenship. But member states also sign to agree to those principles. You are suggesting that the world, the whole world, sign onto something similar, including Myanmar, which they would never do.

Do you understand now?

 

[Quantum Quack]

And if you were the leader of the world, then sure..

But you are not.

And you clearly have not read your own link.

To have "global citizenship", it would require the world to basically exist without borders.

Look at the EU as a prime example. Member states can essentially travel to other member states without requiring visa's, for example. And each member has their own laws and citizenship. But member states also sign to agree to those principles. You are suggesting that the world, the whole world, sign onto something similar, including Myanmar, which they would never do.

Do you understand now?

Well you know uhm...many did when the signed up to the UN.

It's really hard to understand why you would reject an idea that would have possibly prevented the Rohingya from having their citizenship stripped in the first place.
Why are you so reluctant to think beyond the limits of your cynicism?

 

[Quantum Quack]

If as you suggest the Rohingya had their citizenship stripped to facilitate genocide, then obviously international citizenship may have prevented such genocide.
The existence of international citizenship if available would have seriously limited any benefit the genocidal military would have had. Thus de-motivated from stripping citizenship.

Can you discuss anything without trolling ad homenim polluting the words you produce?

International citizenship could if implimented properly render the act of genocide to history with no place in the future.

 

[Quantum Quack]

The first city to be officially mundialised was the small French city of Cahors (only 20,000 in 2006), the capital city of the Département of Lot in central France, on 20 July 1949. Hundreds of cities mundialised themselves over a few years, most of them in France, and then it spread internationally, including to many German cities and to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In less than a year, 10 General Councils (the elected councils of the French "Départements"), and hundreds of cities in France covering 3.4 million inhabitants voted mundialisation charters. One of the goals was to elect one delegate per million inhabitants to a People's World Constitutional Convention given the already then historical failure of the United Nations in creating a global institution able to negotiate a final world peace. To date, more than 1000 cities and towns have declared themselves World cities, including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Philadelphia, Toronto, Hiroshima, Tokyo, Nivelles, and Königswinter.[51]​

Src https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_citizenship

 

[Bells]

Well you know uhm...many did when the signed up to the UN.

It's really hard to understand why you would reject an idea that would have possibly prevented the Rohingya from having their citizenship stripped in the first place.
Why are you so reluctant to think beyond the limits of your cynicism?

Because I am trying to deal with reality.

Not the fantasies in your head. The very same head that came out and declared there was no genocide, that it was an "eviction", that it was faked by Mexican drug cartels.

You are not deal with what is real.

You have made ridiculous claims, refused to back them up. You were asked to stop. You were asked to back up your claims.

You still refuse to do so.

And like the usual troll, you avoid supporting the claims you have made by changing the subject.

Enough is enough.

The existence of international citizenship if available would have seriously limited any benefit the genocidal military would have had. Thus de-motivated from stripping citizenship.

Can you discuss anything without trolling ad homenim polluting the words you produce?

International citizenship could if implimented properly render the act of genocide to history with no place in the future.

Alternatively, a genocide can be declared, the international community is obligated to respond, those who commit the genocide face trial and the Rohingya are allowed to return home, regain their citizenship and all that comes with it.

You know, reality.

Now, once again, back up your claims that this is not a genocide, that it is faked by Mexican drug cartels or whatever else, you claimed it was not a genocide but an "eviction" and all false, etc. Support those claims or retract them, apologise for lying and stop trolling.