Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Imagine this scenario: one early morning, in the pre-dawn darkness, 30 Bangladesh police
and army outposts were attacked simultaneously, along with about 60 Muslim villages, by
7000 - 10,000 Buddhists shouting praises to Lord Buddha, with weaponry ranging from
automatic weapons, handmade bombs and landmines, swords, knives and clubs. And, their
goal was to kill or send fleeing every single non-Buddhist in the land, and to declare the land
an autonomous Buddhist State.
1
WHAT IF THE SITUATION DESCRIBED ABOVE HAD HAPPENED IN CHINA?
WHAT IF THE SITUATION DESCRIBED ABOVE HAD HAPPENED IN INDIA, WITH MULTIPLE
COORDINATED ATTACKS BY HINDU MILITANTS AGAINST MUSLIM VILLAGERS?
Similarly, the response would be the same, OR MORE LIKELY EVEN HARSHER than the
response of the Burmese Army.
I am not saying this to approve or excuse the actions taken, I would rather see NO killing and
suffering. However, I see a lot of naive finger pointing at the Burmese Military, and nearly
ZERO critical analysis of the situation from multiple viewpoints.
Imagine if the Burmese Military had not responded at all, or in any of the above situations, if
the armed forces of each respective country had not responded. What would have happened
then?
In the case of Myanmar, and all of the above scenarios, the primary duty of the armed forces
is to protect, rescue, and assure the people attacked, and to pursue and neutralize the threat
against them. Ideally the response to a major terrorist attack should be thorough enough to
prevent more terrorist attacks.
2
As well, the focus should be on the primary aggressor, ie: ARSA which chose to attack the
security forces of Myanmar, and had the genocidal plan to kill or send fleeing every single
non-Muslim in the land, and to declare the land an autonomous Islamic State for Muslims
only.
Anywhere in the world, aggressors who attack Police and/or Army forces are ALWAYS going
to face SEVERE retaliation. I would think that even ARSA planners and leaders knew that,
but their Islamic ideology incurred them to be so inhumane to their own people. Ata Ullah
made the infamous (and intercepted) statement just after the August 25, 2017 attacks that
“even if one million ‘Rohingya’ die it is okay for the cause.”
Some may even say the Burmese Army did not respond decisively enough. (Once again, I
am not saying this to approve or excuse the measures taken, but one has to see and
understand unpleasant views.) Think about this: ARSA (then known as Harakah al-Yaqin)
staged its first major coordinated surprise attacks against the Burmese security forces in
October, 2016. The Army responded - as any country in the world would have to - BUT,
THEN, ONLY 10 MONTHS LATER launched MUCH bigger attacks with many more targets,
by many more assailants. If the concept of stopping a militant terrorist group from attacking
again by decisively destroying their ability to do so, then the Burmese Military failed
miserably. And that means it did not respond disproportionately enough - only 10 months
later ARSA attacked much more vigorously.
In all of the above scenarios, armies have to respond quite quickly and harshly, to protect
and rescue the people in danger. Every country surrounding Myanmar would have reacted
similarly, and most of the countries surrounding Myanmar would have reacted even more
forcefully, severely, and disproportionately.
Papers at scribd.com/rheizman