Buddhist militants threaten Burma’s reform process

An emerging nationalism undermines religious freedom

Quo vadis, Burma? Such is the question on the lips of international observers currently watching moves within the country which offer worrying indications of slippage back to the days of dictatorial rule.

Having shown itself open to reforms amid a new mood of openness from 2010 which saw greater freedoms for the press and the freeing of political prisoners, Burma – officially the Republic of the Union of Myanmar – was initially lauded by the international community which responded by lifting, in 2012, sanctions previously slapped on the country’s harsh military regime.

Now, however, political shifts, initially viewed as ‘in the right direction’ albeit slowly by an indulgent western world (neighbouring China never viewed reforms in quite the same positive light), now appear to be moving in quite the other direction courtesy of laws old and new in the country.

Prominent among them is the recent parliamentary defence of a 2008 constitutional clause barring anyone with a spouse or children who hold foreign citizenship from standing for the presidency. A somewhat curious rule, it is only when one realises that Burma’s champion of democracy, Aung San Suu Kyi, was married to a British citizen and is the mother of two sons who also hold British passports that the ‘legal instrument’ is shown up for what it is.

New laws

For readers of The Irish Catholic, the current passage of new laws through parliament, with the backing of President Thein Sein, offers more cause for worry.

Unveiled in May, both the draft inter-faith marriage law and the religion conversion law were first mooted by a group known as the Organisation for the Protection of Race, Religion and Belief (OPRRB). This body, first launched in January, is a collective of Buddhist monks apparently terrified by the perceived implications for their nation of inter-faith marriage and conversion from their faith.

In short, the inter-faith marriage law will outlaw any proposed marriage involving a Buddhist woman (sexist to boot) and a non-Buddhist partner unless the man agrees to convert to her religion. The penalty for violation will be 10 years in prison and the seizure of all personal property.

The proposed religion conversion law, meanwhile, will require parties to engage with a process of legal checks through numerous government departments before any official permission is granted, while proselytising brings a one-year prison sentence.

Not far from the lips of those attending the January gathering to launch OPRRB was the term ‘Muslim’, a community which suffered the full wrath of Buddhist antipathy in 2012 when large-scale rioting broke out across the country. (The founders of OPRRB also support legislation to bar ethnic Rohingya Muslims from voting or forming political parties, further illustrating the level of resentment felt.) Readers of this newspaper will recall the intervention at the height of the rioting by Archbishop Charles Bo of Yangon who shrewdly utilised youth networks to spread a message of peace and tolerance.

Obligations

The draft legislation now in train, however, has been neatly designed so as to further restrict all minority faith traditions in Burma, sparking angry responses from all quarters.

Most vocal has been the religious freedom group, Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW),  which coordinated a
response by no fewer than 80 advocacy organisations in condemning the laws and reminding the ‘reforming’ Burma of its obligations on the world stage.

“The right to freedom of religion or belief is widely recognised as having customary international law status,” CSW reminds. “Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights explicitly states that the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion includes the freedom to change his or her religion or beliefs. The 1981 United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief calls on states to rescind legislation where necessary to prohibit discrimination on religious grounds, and to take all appropriate measures to combat intolerance on the grounds of religion.”

Such measures, CSW states in offering a list of eight specific actions to protect religious freedom, should include “official and unconditional invitations to the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and the UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance to visit the country, and to travel within the country and meet representatives of different communities, political actors and civil society organisations without restriction or hindrance”.

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) concurred with CSW’s criticisms, issuing a message which condemned the Burmese draft laws as having “no place in the 21st Century”.

For his part, Archbishop Bo has once again been the ‘local voice’ in his considered response urging both a rethink and calm in the face of laws which he describes as “dangerous”.

Catastrophe

Writing in a recent op-ed piece for the Washington Post, Archbishop Bo recounts how the years of “crucifixion” endured by the people of Burma under military dictatorship could now be replaced by a rising “extreme Buddhist nationalism”.

Referencing the previous rioting, which inflicted “horrific violence, whipped up by hate speech preached by extremist Buddhist nationalists”, Archbishop Bo warns that a Burma pandering to such extremism may witness a “humanitarian catastrophe” which, while harming the Muslim population, will inevitably draw in the already suffering Christian community, notably in Kachin state, where a civil conflict has created many thousands of internal refugees, currently languishing in camps there.

“Burma stands on a knife edge of hope and fear,” Archbishop Bo writes of the current situation. “The ray of sunshine that the world has heralded is in danger of being replaced by storm clouds. Concern fills our hearts as we see darkness compete with hope. We pray this is not a false dawn.”