While the violence is contained for now, questions are arising over whether minority Muslims can find justice in overwhelmingly Buddhist Burma. No Buddhists have yet faced serious charges, despite atrocities carried out against the Muslim community.

The defendants were accused of involvement in Muslim-Buddhist conflicts that began March 20 in the town of Meikhtila.

(READ MORE: Obama vows US support as Burma leader visits)

Thein Than Oo, a lawyer defending the men, said one of his clients was given life in prison for murder. Myat Ko Ko was also sentenced to an additional two years for unlawful assembly and two for religious disrespect. One of the seven is a minor.

A dispute at a Muslim-owned gold shop in Meikhtila triggered rioting by Buddhists and small-scale retaliation by their Muslim targets. Over several days at least 43 people were killed and 12,000 displaced, most of the victims being Muslims. The unrest later spread to other parts of central Burma.

The lynching of a Buddhist monk after the gold shop was sacked enflamed passions, leading to large-scale violence against Muslims.

Thein Sein’s administration, which came to power in 2011 after half a century of military rule, has been heavily criticized for not doing enough to protect Muslims or stop the violence from spreading since it began with clashes between ethnic Rakhine Buddhists and Muslim Rohingya in the west last year.

Thein Sein on Monday became the first president of Burma to visit the White House in 47 years. President Barack Obama praised him for his efforts to lead his country back on the path to democracy.

However, Obama also said he expressed concern to his counterpart about violence against Muslims in the country. “The displacement of people, the violence directed toward them needs to stop,” he said.

The sectarian violence in Burma that flared nearly a year ago in Rakhine state has morphed into a campaign against the country’s Muslim community in other regions. Mobs of Buddhists armed with machetes have razed thousands of Muslim homes, leaving hundreds dead and forcing 125,000 people, mostly Muslims, to flee.

In a speech at a university in Washington, Thein Sein called for a new era in U.S.-Burma relations. On domestic challenges, he vowed to ensure that communal violence between Buddhists and minority Muslims that has claimed hundreds of lives over the past year would be brought to a halt and that the perpetrators are brought to justice.

The issue was not over as Yingluck told her lawyers to file a complaint. The Nation:

The lawyers filed the complaint against the cartoonist at Dusit police station on Friday afternoon.

They charged Chai with three counts – insulting an official during an operation, defaming another person via publicity and violating the Computerrelated Crime Act, which prohibits posting defamatory comments against others on Internet

BP: BP has long viewed that such criminal defamation suits are a bad, and sometimes stupid, idea – see here and here. BP is also strongly opposed to defamation being criminal regardless of who is being sued – see here and here.

On all levels, this lawsuit is politically a very bad idea:

1. Most people are unknown to wider society and when the are defamed publicly the opinions that people have of that person, particularly those who didn’t know them before, will be formed. One of the purposes of defamation law is to set the record straight i.e. to correct the wrong. For public figures, the situation is not the same. Many people have already formed an opinion of someone who is so prominent. Yes, some attacks can hurt people’s reputation, but many of the attacks against Yingluck haven’t and have backfired? If anything, the insults directed at Yingluck over the past few years have not hurt her popularity.  Interestingly, Chalerm, of all people, recognized this as per this tweet from Veena of The Nation:

Chalerm, on YL being attacked, The more she is attacked, the more popular she would be.

BP: Would agree to the extent that the attacks are insults particularly directly or indirectly stating that Yingluck is a slut/less than wholesome women – see here, here, and (to a much lesser extent) here. The best example of this was last year when the Democrats suffered a drop – it was a short drop – in public support and this coincided with attacks on Yingluck by some Democrats implying that Yingluck was having an extra-marital affair. Yingluck didn’t respond at all at the time which BP viewed infuriated some critics and led them to increase the suggestions of an affair until they eventually gave up because of the political fall-out of the comments.  As noted in the post at the time:

Sometimes,  silence makes more political sense. One could easily say that Obama could have silenced critics of him not being born in the US earlier by releasing the long-form birth certificate earlier, but by delaying he allowed the crazies to come out and this became a welcome distraction as it made the other side look bad.

BP: Of course, the birth certificate analogy doesn’t work completely as Obama can laugh about that, but in a country like Thailand (despite the large prostitution industry) which is still very conservative when it comes to sex, it wouldn’t be possible for Yingluck to laugh at it so silence/ignoring it would be the best policy. Of course, ignoring it completely may be difficult as reporters would likely ask questions, but there are ways to respond without filing a lawsuit.

2. The lawsuit – aside from what Anudith has said (that is for a later post) – also diverted attention away from the cartoonist. As BP stated in 2007, the cartoonist, Chai Ratchawatr, is (or perhaps, “had been”) the most influential cartoonist but as Thai politics has become more polarized BP is no longer sure it is the case. Interestingly, back in 2009, his neutrality was being raised in an article in The Nation when the Democrats filed a complaint against Thai Rath‘s other cartoonist:

In a press conference on Sunday, Satit said Sia’s cartoons were clearly biased against the PM and the Democrat Party.

“Sia did not exercise media ethics and professionalism in his work. He did not offer a professional, honest criticism or offer his opinions in a creative manner so it would lead to a straightforward consumption of news. He did not use his intellect either at a time when the country is facing problems,” he said. “I ask for Sia to be fair, unbiased, professional, ethical and work within media standards.”

He said he would put forward a compilation of pieces done by Sia when he filed complaint with the National Press Council of Thailand.

However, his remarks did not stop Sia from expressing his opinion. Yesterday’s cartoon showed Abhisit sitting in his chair with the messages “it is time a standard label was attached to the chair” and “muzzling the media means muzzling the people” in the background. And as usual, there is a cobra wound around Abhisit’s neck.

Actually, some Thai Rath fans say the newspaper’s cartoons are neutral and balanced by the work of another cartoonist Somchai Katanyutanan or “Chai Ratchawat”.

Chai was criticised by some as supporting the Democrat Party, something he denied. He challenged his fans to find a cartoon done by him that cheered the Democrats, adding that he could easily find one that openly criticised them.

BP: Despite the denials, it was becoming clear at that point that Sia was on one side of the political ledger and Chai on the opposite. Nevertheless, with Chai’s Facebook post it has become some obvious to the point that his cartoons will be seen by some through through the lens of the insult. Sure those on his side of the political divide will cheer on future cartoons that are critical of the government, but independent/swing voters remember the insult when looking at his cartoons (although do think the lawsuit negates this effect somewhat). The insult hurt Chai’s influence with the broader Thai public much more than it hurt Yingluck.

3. Aside from the defamation lawsuits, other complaints have been filed against Chai by the PM’s lawyers including breaching the Computer Crimes Act. This is serious overkill. We can start to draw comparisons with Thaksin and his numerous lawsuits and other actions against the media. The spectre of Thaksin will always be there but Yingluck’s mainly non-confrontational approach and lack of similar lawsuits meant it was clear that Yingluck was taking a different approach with the press. The lawsuit changes that and will hurt Yingluck more than it will ever hurt Chai.

Yingluck should drop the lawsuit..

Never before have Malaysians ventured into such unchartered waters. The outcome of the May 5 general elections has revealed just how split and intensely divided the electorate in the country currently is, and it has set in motion a political and social scenario that is tantamount to having to confront new realities in this nation of some 27 million people.

The fact that the two main political coalitions Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) – spearheaded by Najib Abdul Razak for the former and Anwar Ibrahim for the latter – were tangled in an intense campaign leading up to the elections was emblematic of the fact that Malaysians found themselves divided between two distinctly divergent paths. Recognizing the lack of widespread enthusiasm for the several BN aligned parties, campaign strategists for BN made a distinct choice during the campaign to play up Najib’s relatively favorable public rating as a way to galvanize support. By contrast, Anwar’s popularity and his dynamic public presence set the stage for the campaign to be one about a popularity contest between Najib and Anwar.

Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim speaks during a rally at a stadium in Petaling Jaya, near Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Wednesday, May 8. Pic: AP.

Yet, it was apparent from early on in the buildup to the elections, and since then, that the Malaysian divide is much more than one about two prominent political figures, it is indeed substantive and deep. The fact that Najib had to stem the political bleeding for the ruling coalition that first became most transparent after the 2008 general elections seemed obvious enough. The loss of their two-thirds control of parliament and several key states including Selangor, Penang and Kedah in 2008 was a significant enough blow to BN’s seemingly invincible political machinery. Indeed, one of the main goals of BN this time around was not just to reassert their domination in parliament, but also to recapture the aforementioned state governments from the PR coalitions.

Although BN managed to wrest Kedah from PR’s control, the much coveted states of Selangor and Penang once again remained out of the former’s grasp. Indeed, as is well-known by now, aside from suffering greater losses in these two significant states, Najib’s coalition ceded more ground to the opposition since 2008 as its majority in parliament dropped from 140 to 133 seats while it also lost the popular vote (52 to 48 percent). Yet, having garnered enough seats in a gerrymandered, first-past-the post electoral system, BN has managed to continue its historic streak of uninterrupted control of the federal government.

Most of the postmortems of this highly contentious and charged election have revealed some consistent findings. Of all the kernels of facts about the elections, we know that along with rural voters, a higher proportion of females also leaned heavily towards BN. On the other hand, the younger voters (particularly in those in their 20s and early 30s), for a significant number of whom this would have been their first foray into the electoral rolls, and non-rural voters were more enthusiastic and energized about the opposition.

The significance of this mobilization of younger and more agitated voters is being played out in so-called ‘Black 505′ rallies in various parts of the country in the days since the elections. Notwithstanding the fact that these rallies are far from spontaneous and have come to represent PR’s way of keeping the spotlight on their claims that BN’s parliamentary wins are attributable to gross electoral fraud, the response of PR’s supporters in coming out to these rallies is a telling barometer of the depth and intensity of the political divide.

Thus far, relatively large rallies – in the tens of thousands – not only in PR strongholds such as in Kuala Lumpur and Penang, but also in BN controlled states such as Johor and Negeri Sembilan – suggest that the opposition remains focused and agitated about making sure the issue of electoral fraud does not become a mere footnote.

While these rallies seem unlikely to result in any kind of process that might lead to a reconsideration of the validity of the results in various constituencies as singled out by PR for suspicious voting patterns and tainted ballots, let alone a reversal of the overall outcome as it currently stands, the rallies continue to symbolically undermine the BN government’s legitimacy. Just as critically, they reinforce the fact that the line demarcating the political divide between the two sides of the political divide has never been more tangible and profound.

Continue reading at Asia Sentinel

Former general Thein Sein was the first president of Burma to visit the White House in 47 years. Activists objected to the invitation because of human rights concerns, but it marks a turnaround in international acceptance for Burma after decades of isolation and direct military rule.

President Barack Obama gestures during a meeting with Burma's President Thein Sein in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, on Monday. Pic: AP.

Obama credited Thein Sein for political and economic reforms and ending significant tensions between their two countries.

“We very much appreciate your efforts in leadership in leading Burma in a new direction, and we want you to know that the United States will make every effort to assist you in what I know is a long and sometimes difficult, but ultimately correct, path to follow,” Obama said.

(READ MORE: Analysis: Foreign investment a blessing and a curse for Burma)

In a speech at a university in Washington, Thein Sein called for a new era in U.S.-Burma relations. On domestic challenges, he vowed to ensure that communal violence between Buddhists and minority Muslims that has claimed hundreds of lives over the past year would be brought to a halt and that the perpetrators are brought to justice.

Obama said he expressed concern about violence against Muslims in the country. “The displacement of people, the violence directed toward them needs to stop,” he said.

Obama said they discussed Thein Sein’s intention to release more political prisoners, institutionalize political reform and rule of law and work to end ethnic conflict. “As President (Thein) Sein is the first to admit, this is a long journey and there is still much work to be done,” he said.

Thein Sein previously served in a repressive junta, and his meetings at the White House and Congress would have been all but impossible before he took the helm of a nominally civilian government in 2011. His name was only deleted from a blacklist barring travel to the U.S. in September.

Six months ago, Obama became the first sitting U.S. president to visit the country also known as Myanmar. The administration’s outreach to Burma’s generals has provided an important incentive for the military to loosen controls on citizens and reduce dependence on China.

Burma has been rewarded by relaxation of tough economic sanctions, and Thein Sein will be addressing U.S. businessmen keen to capitalize on the opening of one of Asia’s few untapped markets.

The U.S. last month announced it is considering duty-free access for Burma to U.S. markets, and on Tuesday the two governments will sign a bilateral trade and investment framework agreement.

Obama repeatedly referred to the nation as Burma, a departure from the common U.S. government reference to the country as Burma. White House spokesman Jay Carney said the U.S. government has begun to allow limited use of the name Burma as “a diplomatic courtesy” to show respect for the ambitious reforms the country is pursuing.

The last visit by a Burma leader to the White House was in September 1966 by Ne Win, an independence hero-turned-dictator, who began the nation’s descent from regional rice bowl to economic basket case.

Human rights activists and Burma campaigners have sharply criticized the administration for inviting Thein Sein, arguing it sends the wrong message and wastes leverage to press for further democratic change. The administration says it is important to signal U.S. support for his reform agenda, likely still opposed by military hardliners.

In his speech, Thein Sein said there may be “spoilers” who oppose reforms because their interests are threatened. He said the military has an “important role” to play in the process of democratization and peace-building and was undergoing reforms.

Thein Sein expressed confidence of soon reaching a cease-fire with ethnic Kachin rebels, the only major ethnic insurgency that has yet to reach such a pact with the government. Fighting has escalated in the past two years, displacing about 80,000 villagers. He said this would require devolution of power and new agreements on resource-sharing.

“Our goal cannot be less than sustainable peace,” the Burma leader said at the John Hopkins University of School of Advanced International Studies.

Outside the White House on Monday, about 30 activists opposing Thein Sein’s visit protested corruption in the government and treatment of ethnic Kachins. “We need real changes in Burma to stop the violations,” said an organizer of the rally, Ye Htut of the International Foundation for Burma National Congress.

Despite the historic changes in Burma since 2011, Thein Sein’s government has had a mixed record on reforms in recent months. It has freed more than 850 political prisoners in the past two years — including 19 before his Washington trip — but rights groups say at least 160 are still held.

The government has allowed Red Cross access to its prisons for the first time in seven years, but only limited humanitarian access to conflict zones, including Kachin State.

The U.S. State Department on Monday again designated Burma as a country of special concern for its severe violations of religious freedom, as it has since 1999 in an annual global assessment. It said the government promoted Buddhism, practiced by the majority, over minority faiths that include Islam.

The State Department said there were credible allegations of the involvement of local border security authorities in the burning of villages during the communal violence in western Rakhine State, and of Muslims being arbitrarily detained since June, and reportedly denied food, water, and sleep. Some deaths in custody were reported, the department said.

Worldwide, 32.4 million people were displaced by natural disasters in 2012, according to a report by the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center (IDMC). That’s roughly twice the number of displacements that occurred the previous year.

Monsoon flooding in Assam, India. Pic: Dominique Feron EU/ECHO 2012

In 2012, 14 out of 20 largest natural disasters in terms of displacement were in Asia.

Over the past five years, 81% of global displacement happened in Asia. It should come as no surprise that the two countries with the largest populations – India and China – also lead the world in displacements due to natural disasters.

From the Voice of America:

India suffered the world’s largest displacement in 2012 due to repeated and relentless flooding, which was further compounded again by inter-communal tensions. So in India we saw six-point-nine million people displaced by monsoon floods in the northeast.

–Clare Spurrell, chief spokesperson for the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center

This event was also the 4^th largest of the past five years.

China, however, saw double India’s number of nature-driven displacements from 2008 through 2012. Natural hazards in China have forced 50 million people from their homes over the past five years – 35% of the global total. The two largest events occurred on Chinese soil: 2010’s monsoon floods (15.2 million people) and the 2008 Sichuan earthquake (15 million).

Jundao, Sichuan after 2008 earthquake. Pic: Miniwiki (Wikimedia Commons)

Extreme weather events accounted for 98% of last year’s 32.4 million displacements in China.

From China Dialogue:

More recent events have also wreaked havoc in China, notably a string of severe summer storms in 2012 which collectively broke a number of extreme weather records. The worst of them, Typhoon Haikui, displaced more than 2 million people in eastern China in August after destroying more than 4,400 homes in Zhejiang province alone.

According to the IDMC, deaths associated with major weather events are falling, but displacements are expected to continue to rise. The increase is attributed to a mix of population growth, rapid urbanization and an increase in both the severity and frequency of extreme weather due to climate change.

The world’s top five displacements due to natural disasters from 2008-2012:

1. 2010 China: monsoon floods 15.2 million
2. 2008 China: Sichuan (Wenchuan) earthquake 15.0 million
3. 2010 Pakistan: monsoon floods 11.0 million
4. 2012 North-east India: monsoon floods – 6.9 million
5. 2012 Nigeria floods 6.1 million

(Source: internal-displacement.org)

Access the entire IDMC report here.

Self-styled reformist President Thein Sein has been in office for two years. Thein Sein’s reforms have been welcomed by the US but many at grassroots level in Burma feel they have made little real difference on the ground. The working class, including farmers, refuse to accept the current situation as genuine change.

The most crucial question of political reform that President Obama should not overlook is the economic monopolization by the military elite. They have been exploiting the country’s natural resources under the names of the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Limited (UMEHL) and the Myanmar Economic Corporation (MEC) while the country’s average population has suffered from various social miseries.

U.S. President Barack Obama. Pic: AP.

In the name of change, a quasi-civilian government led by Thein Sein was formed with former military generals.  Not surprisingly, this has done little to allay the fears of citizens who continue to live under an undemocratic regime defined by the 2008 Constitution drawn by the previous junta.

The 2008 Constitution came into place after a sham referendum in May 2008 held in the wake of Cyclone Nargis, which  caused more than 138,000 deaths and left millions homeless. The biggest flaw in the constitution is that 25 percent of seats in the parliament are reserved for unelected military generals nominated by the commander-in-chief.

Many ethnic leaders claim that they don’t trust the 2008 Constitution, which ensures the military still holds a huge amount of power in Burma. For example, the 11-member National Defense and Security Council retains the constitutional right to declare an emergency at any time.

Ahead of Thein Sein’s flight to the US his government released 23 prisoners, of which 19 are confirmed to be political prisoners according to the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma), through a so-called amnesty. Human rights groups say more than 100 political prisoners are still held.

Many political leaders want the US President to pressure Thein Sein to stop aggressive wars against ethnic people.  If  the Thein Sein government wants to be a true reformist administration, it has to stop the wars in Shan and Kachin states.

Thein Sein’s reforms have done little to stop land grabs by the military, local authorities and government cronies. As a result, the people are suffering severe unemployment in a country where five million citizens have already migrated to neighboring countries in search of work. Most of the migrants are in Thailand and Malaysia due to unemployment and food shortage problems.

Burma remains one of the world’s least developed countries, and was ranked 149 out of 187 countries in the 2011 UN Human Development Index. Burma was ranked 172 out of 176  in the world by Transparency International’s annual Corruption Perceptions Index in 2012 – fifth from bottom above Sudan, Afghanistan, North Korea and Somalia.

President Obama should encourage President Thein Sein to have candid political objectives, such as to release all political prisoners immediately, to declare a nationwide ceasefire to show a commitment to meaningful political dialogue with all dissident groups, and to broadcast a general amnesty in the quest for peace, stability and real progress in the multi-ethnic country.

The time is not ripe yet for President Obama to welcome Thein Sein without question as Burma still has a long way to go.

But activists are angry about President Barack Obama hosting Thein Sein, and lawmakers are wary. The Burma leader has led the shift from decades of direct military rule, but has stalled on some reform commitments and failed to stop bloody outbursts of ethnic violence.

U.S. President Barack Obama and Burma President Thein Sein pictured together at an event in 2011. Pic: AP.

Thein Sein previously served in a repressive junta, and his meetings at the White House and Congress would have been all-but-impossible before he took the helm of a nominally civilian government in 2011. His name was only deleted from a blacklist barring travel to the U.S. last September.

He arrived in Washington Saturday, six months after Obama made history with an unprecedented U.S. presidential visit to the country also known as Myanmar. The administration’s outreach to Burma’s generals has provided an important incentive for the military to loosen controls on citizens and reduce dependence on China.

(UPDATE: Analysis: Foreign investment a blessing and a curse for Burma)

Burma has been rewarded by relaxation of tough economic sanctions, and Thein Sein will be addressing U.S. businessmen keen to capitalize on the opening of one of Asia’s few untapped markets.

“President Thein Sein’s visit underscores President Obama’s commitment to supporting and assisting those governments that make the important decision to embrace reform,” the White House said in its announcement of Monday’s visit.

It will be the first by a Burma leader since a September 1966 visit by Ne Win, an independence hero-turned dictator, who began the nation’s descent from regional rice bowl to economic basket case. Thein Sein visited New York last September for the U.N. General Assembly but did not come to Washington.

The U.S. last month announced it is considering duty-free access for Burma to U.S. markets, and there could be progress Monday toward a bilateral trade and investment framework agreement.

The most significant outcome of Thein Sein’s trip could be a symbolic one. Obama is expected to use “Burma” — the country name adopted by the junta in 1989 — when he meets Thein Sein. However, the U.S. will keep using “Burma” in official documents.

Thein Sein will be accorded the protocol due to a foreign president, yet his Washington welcome will pale next to that granted last September to Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader who met Obama and was presented by Congress with the highest civilian award it can bestow.

Human rights activists and Burma campaigners have sharply criticized the administration for inviting Thein Sein, arguing it sends the wrong message and wastes leverage to press for further democratic change. The administration says it is important to signal U.S. support for his reform agenda, likely still opposed by military hardliners.

Ahead of the trip, Burma released at least 19 political prisoners in what has become a pattern for amnesties that coincide with high-profile international meetings as a way of highlighting the government’s benevolent policies. Right groups say at least 160 political detainees are still held.

Thein Sein’s office director Zaw Htay denied in a posting on his Facebook page Friday that the government was using political prisoners as “tools,” saying the president was striving for an “all-inclusive political process.”

There has been mixed progress on 11 reform commitments made in November just before Obama visited.

The government has permitted the International Committee of the Red Cross access to its notorious prisons for the first time in seven years. But hasn’t allowed adequate humanitarian access to conflict zones where tens of thousands have been displaced. Authorities have failed to stop, and may have abetted in some cases, an explosion in communal violence that has killed hundreds and led to segregation of Muslim communities.

The U.S. Campaign for Burma said Thein Sein’s trip follows a troubling downward trend in Burma, and that “instead of honoring an abusive leader” the U.S. should tie its concessions to conditions.

The Obama administration’s engagement with Burma has been a rare area of bipartisan agreement in Washington, but some lawmakers have begun to voice concern that the U.S. could be moving too fast. House members have opposed moves for resumption of even preliminary military-to-military cooperation.

“I’m incredibly concerned about the facts on the ground in Burma, including human rights violations against ethnic nationalities, the use of rape as a weapon of war and brutal violence against Muslims — including women and children,” Democratic Rep. Joe Crowley, a prominent voice in Congress on Burma, said in a statement. He urged the administration to stick to its initial policy of “action for action” in its relations with Burma.

On the eve of Thein Sein’s arrival, Crowley and Republican Rep. Peter King introduced legislation aimed at extending a ban on gems imports from Burma that will lapse in July. Much of the jade and rubies Burma exports come from northern Kachin State, scene of bitter fighting in recent months between the army and ethnic rebels.