Thais hold more migrants amid row

[MisterMatlock]

Been a hell of a first month for the Oxford pretty boy. Did you like the Mugabe-esque denial of access to the refugees for UN officials that Abhisit pulled off? We'll make this guy a proper Thai politician come hell or high water. :wink: I wonder what "highlights" the next month will bring...

[Stramash]

Thailand changes tack on refugees

(BBC 27/1/09)

The latest boatload of Burmese migrants to arrive in Thailand has been handed to the police rather than the military, after an outcry over their treatment.

The Thai military picked up 78 Rohingya boat people, who are Burmese Muslims, and handed them to the police.

It follows claims from other Rohingya, washed up in Indonesia and elsewhere, that the Thai military had beaten them and sent them back to sea.

It is thought almost 1,000 have been set adrift - with hundreds feared dead.

Rights groups have expressed outrage at their treatment.

The Rohingya are fleeing persecution in their home country, where they are denied citizenship by the government.

Our correspondent in Thailand, Jonathan Head, says the most recent group are the very picture of misery.

He says they are exhausted and emaciated and several are carrying vivid scars across their backs - which they say are the result of being whipped by the Burmese navy as they left, as a warning not to come back.

Thai television broadcast images of the police looking after the latest group to land in Thailand - giving them food and medicine.

Police Col Veerasilp Kwanseng said most of the refugees were suffering from "quite serious exhaustion" and needed medical help.

"Many had wounds on their bodies, but I don't know exactly what caused them," he told Reuters.

Our correspondent says the fact they have been handed to the police means they should be processed by the courts - and if they are deported it is likely to be in a more humane manner than the way many have been expelled by the military.

Thailand's new government says it is trying to establish exactly what happened, but our correspondent says the government is getting little co-operation from the armed forces.

Senior military officers have denied such mistreatment is even possible, and have accused the foreign media of trying to tarnish Thailand's international image, our correspondent adds

[drlovelife8]

haha You deadbeat...

I'm not saying that the attitude expressed above towards Muslims or Muslim refugees is right, wrong or indifferent. But it is a reflection of the influence of the Wahhabi creed across the globe. Wherever there is a disaffected Muslim minoroity, the Wahhabis show up. Violence ensues.

Why would any sane government willingly invite those problems into it's country. Especially a government which is already having significant problems with one Muslim minority population.

Kinda like pouring gunpowder onto a gasoline fire.

As I've said before, most Muslims that I have encountered are peaceful folks who simply want to live their lives and make things better for the next generation. Just like any other group of folks on the planet.

The problem comes when those Saudi funded madrassas start popping up and the Imams and teachers start spouting that "infidel" rhetoric.

Next thing you know, you've got an intifada on your hands.

The Wahhabi victimize the poor of the Muslim world. These refugees are the exact pool of folks that are ripe and ready for the Wahhabi victimization.

Again, why would you invite that potential problem into your country?

Agreed.

Wahhabi (permanently pluralized) look for any poor Islamic places and send what begins as a charity. This money slowly gets used for other things and builds hatred. These bastards are the reason why so many Muslims don't get a fair deal in the world. Well that and some very genuine terrorism.

Yep yep yep, they must be all evil, lets send them to a slow and painful death without a trial or a chance.

I am not saying that, but Beej, look around, it is what happens and is no secret,. They WANT wahabbie to spread, it is no secret.

[Jay7]

And it tastes great on sashimi.

[LakeGeneve]

Thailand changes tack on refugees

(BBC 27/1/09)

The latest boatload of Burmese migrants to arrive in Thailand has been handed to the police rather than the military, after an outcry over their treatment. The Thai military picked up 78 Rohingya boat people, who are Burmese Muslims, and handed them to the police. It follows claims from other Rohingya, washed up in Indonesia and elsewhere, that the Thai military had beaten them and sent them back to sea.

It is thought almost 1,000 have been set adrift - with hundreds feared dead. Rights groups have expressed outrage at their treatment. The Rohingya are fleeing persecution in their home country, where they are denied citizenship by the government. Our correspondent in Thailand, Jonathan Head, says the most recent group are the very picture of misery.

He says they are exhausted and emaciated and several are carrying vivid scars across their backs - which they say are the result of being whipped by the Burmese navy as they left, as a warning not to come back.

Thai television broadcast images of the police looking after the latest group to land in Thailand - giving them food and medicine. Police Col Veerasilp Kwanseng said most of the refugees were suffering from "quite serious exhaustion" and needed medical help. "Many had wounds on their bodies, but I don't know exactly what caused them," he told Reuters.

I didn't realise that the numbers suggested were 1000!

It was sort of surreal to see the news on thai TV showing the police being polite handing out water, food and medical staff administering first aid to this group. Some good PR in front of the camera.

[Stramash]

Thailand changes tack on refugees

(BBC 27/1/09)

The latest boatload of Burmese migrants to arrive in Thailand has been handed to the police rather than the military, after an outcry over their treatment. The Thai military picked up 78 Rohingya boat people, who are Burmese Muslims, and handed them to the police. It follows claims from other Rohingya, washed up in Indonesia and elsewhere, that the Thai military had beaten them and sent them back to sea.

It is thought almost 1,000 have been set adrift - with hundreds feared dead. Rights groups have expressed outrage at their treatment. The Rohingya are fleeing persecution in their home country, where they are denied citizenship by the government. Our correspondent in Thailand, Jonathan Head, says the most recent group are the very picture of misery.

He says they are exhausted and emaciated and several are carrying vivid scars across their backs - which they say are the result of being whipped by the Burmese navy as they left, as a warning not to come back.

Thai television broadcast images of the police looking after the latest group to land in Thailand - giving them food and medicine. Police Col Veerasilp Kwanseng said most of the refugees were suffering from "quite serious exhaustion" and needed medical help. "Many had wounds on their bodies, but I don't know exactly what caused them," he told Reuters.

I didn't realise that the numbers suggested were 1000!

It was sort of surreal to see the news on thai TV showing the police being polite handing out water, food and medical staff administering first aid to this group. Some good PR in front of the camera.

And that's it exactly; great pr. But the Rohingya are still being sent to court for entering Thailand illegally (with the probability being they will be sent back to Myanmar) and the group set up to mount an investigation into mistreatment of the refugees by the Thai Military are...(drum roll)...The Thai Military!!! So that will be fair, impartial and transparent.

A twist to this tale is Burma's response; (from bbc.co.uk)

... an unnamed Burmese official told the AFP news agency on Thursday that there was no evidence to suggest the Rohingya were even from his country.

"There is no so-called Rohingya ethnic minority group in our history before or after our independence," he said.

"It is totally unacceptable to say the Rohingya are from Myanmar [burma]."

:shock:

[Loburt]

And that's it exactly; great pr. But the Rohingya are still being sent to curt for entering Thailand illegally (with the probability being they will be sent back to Myanmar) ...

Several elements of this whole story are murky.

Are these men really refugees? As someone in Thai officialdom pointed out: if they are really refugees, where are the women and children? I've been to the border and watched waves of Karen and other refugees fleeing the Burmese Army, and there are always plenty of women and children and old people.

Not this time.

These appear to be boatloads of men, which suggests the possibility of people smuggling/human trafficking.

Yes, the Rohingya are a persecuted minority in Burma. But there are probably more than 20 million others in Burma who can claim the same thing.

If they were fleeing persecution, the logical place for them to go is Bangladesh - as they have in the past - not get in a boat and head to Thailand.

Did they come directly from Burma? Or did the flee to Bangladesh first, didn't like living in refugee camps there and decide to head someplace else where maybe they would find work?

All these things are unclear.

If they had left from Bangladesh, then they had already received sanctuary as refugees, and wouldn't seem to have a right to say I prefer to bea refugee in Thailand so let's go there.

And if they were fleeing directly from Burma, why didn't they bring their families with them? Are only the men persecuted? Not likely.

When the Vietnamese boat people fled repression, there were women, children and families in those boats.

These boats full of men, on the face of it, resemble more the Golden Venture, the ship full of Chinese men that ran aground in New York several years ago - and which was a people smuggling operation that left from Thailand!

It's not like the Thais turn their backs on all refugees. There are more than 150,000 refugees from Burma living in camps inside Thailand, plus hundreds of thousands more who have made their way into Thailand illegally - either because of persecution or because of poverty.

There is no excuse for pushing people out to sea in the manner that was done, but how many people is Thailand supposed to take?

And if they are migrants, and not refugees, what do countries usually do with illegal migrants? Deport them.

Now, I'm not necessarily for sending them back to Burma. I'm not sure what the answer is at this point seeing as how many unanswered questions there are.

But so far, by and large, the Thais now seem to at least be trying to adopt a reasonable approach to this problem by not pushing them out to sea, and trying to arrange a regional meeting of all the countries affected and involved to try and find a cooperative solution. And this won't be an easy problem to solve.

So is it just p.r.? Or trying to do some things the right way?

[beej]

Yes its all a bit murky, a lots been hushed up as well, for obvious reasons.

Even if these boat loads of people were all men coming from a people smuggling ring, you don't just tow them out to sea and send them to their deaths.

[SweetieBabie]

It's saddening, where is the humanity?

If they are an unwanted group of ethnic, why do i see only photos of men but none of the women, elderly and children? Where are they? You would think they would all be expelled from where they were ....

Oops, Loburt already said that.....

[beej]

Hussain, 50, was among 78 migrants on the boat. Twelve minors were being held separately because they are too young to be tried, said Ranong police Col. Weerasilp Kwanseng.

[LakeGeneve]

And that's it exactly; great pr. But the Rohingya are still being sent to curt for entering Thailand illegally (with the probability being they will be sent back to Myanmar) ...

Several elements of this whole story are murky.

Are these men really refugees? As someone in Thai officialdom pointed out: if they are really refugees, where are the women and children? I've been to the border and watched waves of Karen and other refugees fleeing the Burmese Army, and there are always plenty of women and children and old people.

Not this time.

These appear to be boatloads of men, which suggests the possibility of people smuggling/human trafficking.

Yes, the Rohingya are a persecuted minority in Burma. But there are probably more than 20 million others in Burma who can claim the same thing.

If they were fleeing persecution, the logical place for them to go is Bangladesh - as they have in the past - not get in a boat and head to Thailand.

Did they come directly from Burma? Or did the flee to Bangladesh first, didn't like living in refugee camps there and decide to head someplace else where maybe they would find work?

All these things are unclear.

If they had left from Bangladesh, then they had already received sanctuary as refugees, and wouldn't seem to have a right to say I prefer to bea refugee in Thailand so let's go there.

And if they were fleeing directly from Burma, why didn't they bring their families with them? Are only the men persecuted? Not likely. When the Vietnamese boat people fled repression, there were women, children and families in those boats.

These boats full of men, on the face of it, resemble more the Golden Venture, the ship full of Chinese men that ran aground in New York several years ago - and which was a people smuggling operation that left from Thailand!

It's not like the Thais turn their backs on all refugees. There are more than 150,000 refugees from Burma living in camps inside Thailand, plus hundreds of thousands more who have made their way into Thailand illegally - either because of persecution or because of poverty.

There is no excuse for pushing people out to sea in the manner that was done, but how many people is Thailand supposed to take?

And if they are migrants, and not refugees, what do countries usually do with illegal migrants? Deport them.

Now, I'm not necessarily for sending them back to Burma. I'm not sure what the answer is at this point seeing as how many unanswered questions there are.

But so far, by and large, the Thais now seem to at least be trying to adopt a reasonable approach to this problem by not pushing them out to sea, and trying to arrange a regional meeting of all the countries affected and involved to try and find a cooperative solution. And this won't be an easy problem to solve.

So is it just p.r.? Or trying to do some things the right way?

Loburt I am a little suprised at how forgiving you are but I agree much is not still clear about the actual groups. Firstly, it doesn't really matter if they are asylum seekers (refugee is not the correct term until any claims are assessed & they are accorded that status under the Ref. Convention), economic migrants, people being trafficked or fishermen lost at sea.

It doesnt really matter who they are. You CANNOT just tow people out to sea and send them on their way. It is indefensible under any circumstances. They have to be processed according to due process and dealt with under the law and any humanitarian needs met. I am sure that thais would be equally as outraged if a boatload of thais were treated in the same manner. We should not forget that some thais are subject to illegal migration and are trafficked.

So if they are illegally entering the country en route to Malaysia for work then yes prosecute and deport but make enquiries first to confirm and check humanitarian needs. And, if it is trafficking as you suggest then the very definition of such requires thailand to assist and intervene. Thailand has made commitments to this end in both regional and internation forae.

In terms of persecution and gender there is a wealth of history of groups fleeing where males are sent first before and families follow later especially with muslim groups. This is an accepted pattern in some refugee movements eg. Afghans and Iraqis. Each movement is unique. However, recent history does suggest a mixture of fleeing persecution and seeking economic employment to Malaysia where they have faced further persecution - see HRW reports over the last 10 yrs(http://www.hrw.org/en/search/apachesolr_search/Rohingya).

If they have been accorded a protection status in Bangladesh then it may true that Thailand has no obligation (Note: Thailand is still not a party to the Refugee Convention and thus UNHCR at the request of the govt operates in country), unless they are being persecuted in Bangladesh as well which has happened in the past (again see HRW reports).

And in terms of accomodating asylum seekers and refugess Thailand has indeed done much but it has also played a part in creating some of the problems in the region. As you know better than most many along the border are subject to appalling treatment by some authorities and exploitation such as for cheap labour is rife. Some are kept as virtual slaves such as we saw after the Tsunami in the south with the fishing fleets. And the incidents of people fleeing being conflict forced back into Burma are numerous, http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/07/17/thailand-stop-forced-returns-karen-refugees-burma. It is not as if these recent incidents are something new.

Let's be honest and say such things have been going away from watchful eyes for years by some officials on the border motivated by a combination of racism, nationalism and intentional disreagard for the rule of law. The humanitarian history of accomodating the less fortunate in this country is undermined by the ugly reality of exploitation and racism that exists in many places. Not unique to thailand of course!

It is a very complex issue and yes will not be easy to solve when one looks at the fact it has been in existence for many years. However, the sooner that thai security authorities adhere to basic standards, ensure due process and treat people with dignity; the better for all concerned.

[LakeGeneve]

The boatload of Rohingya picked up off Sumatra the other day are reportedly telling some pretty appalling stories about their treatment by the thai navy consistent with the earlier allegations. The denials of the govt regarding the allegations of mistreatment are looking increasingly untenable but we do all have our political debts.....

Preliminary interviews by Indonesian Navy personnel indicated that the men were all members of the Rohingya Muslim minority in Myanmar who had fled to Thailand in December. Survivors from the first boat, which was found in early January and was also carrying about 200 men, told the Indonesian authorities at the time that they had been rounded up by the Thai military after escaping Myanmar, beaten, dragged out to sea and abandoned. The survivors who were rescued Monday told Indonesian Navy personnel the same story, adding that originally there was a flotilla of nine motorless boats that had been led out to sea by the Thais, containing about 1,200 people

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/03/asia/indo.2-422008.php

The govt is still in denial which is a shame given how the PM stated that Rule of Law and Human Rights would be a key platform of this govt. Kasit is starting to sound as though he has been taught by the CCP in how to deal with bad press which is of course always a winner tactic with most;

'Don't believe what the world says about Rohingya' Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya said yesterday that people should not believe international news reports about the Rohingya boat people being treated inhumanely in Thailand.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/02/05/national/national_30095035.php

Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya denied Thursday that Thai authorities cruelly towed Rohingya migrants out to sea.

Health workers at Idi State Hospital in Aceh province said the latest boatload of Burmese to wash up on the beach showed wounds and scars. "The injuries we've seen on them are consistent with their claims that they had been abused by the Thai military," said the head of the Idi State Hospital in Aceh province, where 68 of the migrants are still being treated. "There were several marks on the skin which were likely the result of being hit with blunt objects like sticks or rope. One of them had scars from being whipped with a rope on his body," said Zulfikry.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/136212/kasit-denies-rohingya-mistreatment

And you may have seen that the boatload of 78 that arrived in Ranong early last week - shown being treated well in front of the cameras - were all convicted in court on immigration offences and subject to deportation (except of the 12 in hospital at the time). But deported to where is the question?

The plight of the Rohingya people has worsened after Burma, Bangladesh and Thailand confirmed their status as illegal immigrants and refused them sanctuary. Aye Aye Mu, Burmese charge d'affaires to Thailand, said in Ranong province yesterday Burma did not recognise Rohingya people as citizens and allowed them to stay on its soil only for humanitarian reasons.

Sayed Golam Zahid, Bangladeshi charge d'affaires to Thailand, also said in Ranong that Rohingya people were not citizens of Bangladesh.He said their migration to Bangladesh started in 1978. He said it was believed there are about 300,000 Rohingya living in Bangladesh.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/11046/little-solace-for-rohingya-as-sanctuary-denied

So this lot were at least treated well it seems and subject to due process which is at least an improvement but still no acceptance of any potential wrong doing. I cannot wait to see what the ISOC investigation concludes.

Hopefully a regional solution may finally create a solution to this problem to a group of people that no one seemingly wants to recognise or host.

[beej]

I cannot wait to see what the ISOC investigation concludes.

Lets see if the ISOC give a **** about 'saving face'.

[beej]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7872635.stm

Nice article.

[LakeGeneve]

And this was a good one in Spectrum 2 weeks ago; http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/investigation/10412/asylum-seekers-told-to-look-elsewhere

Seems that the PM is stating that there will be accountability for those responsible if the allegations are upheld by ISOC ( :roll: ) but we all know accountability in officaldom generally means being moved to a "non-active" post!

(I have been applying for one of these non-active posts for years but I don't seem to be able to meet the criteria of doing nothing whilst getting paid!)

[Loburt]

Loburt I am a little suprised at how forgiving you are but I agree much is not still clear about the actual groups. Firstly, it doesn't really matter if they are asylum seekers (refugee is not the correct term until any claims are assessed & they are accorded that status under the Ref. Convention), economic migrants, people being trafficked or fishermen lost at sea.

It doesnt really matter who they are. You CANNOT just tow people out to sea and send them on their way. It is indefensible under any circumstances.

I did not say that towing them out to sea was the right thing to do, so don't suggest or imply in any way that I did.

I clearly wrote that there is "no excuse" for that.

Please read what I actually wrote.

In terms of persecution and gender there is a wealth of history of groups fleeing where males are sent first before and families follow later especially with muslim groups. This is an accepted pattern in some refugee movements eg. Afghans and Iraqis. Each movement is unique.

These flows of Rohingya boat people have been going on for several years now, as you have noted, and we have yet to see flows of families following.

I also notice that Indonesia's reaction to the boat people, until two days ago, was that they were illegal migrants looking for work, and they were being detained at a naval base and would be deported. Malaysia also has a record of deporting them as illegals.

Now, because of international pressure, the Indonesians say they will re-examine the situation. International pressure is good. This issue needs to be re-examined, and as the Thais have called for, in a regional forum. It's a regional problem.

But at this point in time, I'm not convinced these people qualify as refugees/asylum seekers.

It is a very complex issue and yes will not be easy to solve when one looks at the fact it has been in existence for many years. However, the sooner that thai security authorities adhere to basic standards, ensure due process and treat people with dignity; the better for all concerned.

Well,I agree but it seems that they have already changed the way they are handling it. What I originally took issue with, and prompted me to post, was that this change was just being done for "PR." And that the Thais are just consistently and unfailingly bad in dealing with refugees or illegals.

I disagree. The facts don't support that. As I wrote before, there are instances of Thailand doing terrible things to refugees/illegals, and also instances of Thailand showing great compassion. Human Rights Watch calls Thailand's record "mixed", and that is accurate.

The policy on how to handle people coming across the borders does come from ISOC. But the national ISOC is chaired by the Prime Minister. In all likelihood, the policy of turning them out to sea came from previous administrations. I had read somewhere that it was a policy instituted under Samak, but I don't know that to be a fact.

This story broke when the current administration had been in office just over a month. I doubt they were even aware this was going on. Once they were confronted with it, they made sure the way of dealing with it changed.

Whether or not they can or are willing to hold anyone accountable for what happened is another matter. But Democrat administrations have a clear record of handling refugees/asylum seekers/illegal immigrants in a more humane manner than the Chavalit/Thaksin/Samak crew. It's not perfect, but it's clearly better. So I don't think their reaction was just a matter of PR.

[beej]

But at this point in time, I'm not convinced these people qualify as refugees/asylum seekers.

Really, why?

[CiaranM]

from the BBC last week ....bit long hiope u can find the time to read it !!

What drives the Rohingya to sea?

By Jonathan Head

BBC News, Bangkok

The dramatic testimony from survivors of a draconian Thai military policy of towing Rohingya boat people out to sea and leaving them there has drawn international attention to the plight of one of the world's most oppressed people.

The numbers heading out into the Andaman Sea have increased sharply

So what is it that is driving so many Rohingya, a Muslim minority from the western-most part of Burma, to flee in rickety boats in the hope of finding refuge elsewhere?

The term Rohingya refers to a distinct, Muslim ethnic group living in northern Rakhine state, along the border with Bangladesh.

They are thought to be descended from Arab and other Muslim traders who travelled and settled there more than 1,000 years ago.

They speak a dialect of Bengali similar to that spoken in the Cox's Bazaar region of Bangladesh.

There are perhaps one million living there, but may be as many more living overseas, mainly in Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia and Malaysia.

Harassed and beaten

Northern Rakhine state is one of the poorest and most isolated in Burma.

But the burdens imposed on the Rohingya by Burma's military rulers make their situation a whole lot worse than other people living in the area.

Survivor's ordeal on Andaman Sea

"Economic hardship and chronic poverty prevents many thousands of people in north Rakhine state from gaining food security," says Chris Kaye, the country director for the UN's World Food Programme who visited there two months ago.

"Many do not have land rights or access to farmland to grow food, and the restrictions and limitations on the movement of people, goods and commodities places additional stress on people's livelihood opportunities."

For a start, the Rohingya are denied citizenship under Burma's 1982 citizenship law, which leaves them out of the 135 ethnic groups officially recognised by the state.

The official view of the Burmese military is that they are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh or their descendants.

Rohingya trying to leave Burma are often harassed and beaten by the Burmese security forces, but then allowed to leave, and told never to return.

They are also unable to travel freely. The military demands that they obtain an official permit even to travel to the next town.

It is almost impossible for them to get permission to travel outside northern Rakhine.

Marriage restrictions

Rohingya are subjected to routine forced labour.

The amount of time they have to give varies, but Chris Lewa at the Arakan Project says that typically a Rohingya man will have to give up one day a week to work on military or government projects, and one night for sentry duty.

This reduces the time they have to earn a living for their families. Burmese Buddhists living in the area are usually not required to do this.

Some Rohingyas said they were beaten by the Thai authorities

The Rohingya have also lost a lot of arable land, which has been confiscated by the military to give to Buddhist settlers from elsewhere in Burma.

One of the most bizarre forms of discrimination imposed on the Rohingya is that they must get official permission to get married.

Like all the other documents they must obtain, these give opportunities for officials to extort money from them, and the marriage approval can take two years or more.

Couples caught getting married or sleeping together without this approval can be arrested.

The Arakan Project has documented a number of cases where the men have been jailed, in one case for seven years. When they get married they are required to sign a commitment not to have more than two children.

Camp squalor

This litany of abuse and harassment makes the Rohingya a downtrodden underclass even in Burma, one of the world's most repressive and impoverished states.

The Thai military's hardline approach in recent weeks has backfired badly

This is why 200,000 fled to Bangladesh in 1978, and another 250,000 between 1991 and 1992. There has been a steady stream into Bangladesh since then.

But the numbers heading out into the Andaman Sea by boat have increased sharply over the past two to three years.

There has been no discernable deterioration in the way the Rohingya are being treated by the Burmese authorities, as in 1978 and 1991, so other factors are driving them to leave.

Conditions for the Rohingya in Bangladesh are grim. Around 28,000 live in the two officially recognised camps, which get some assistance from the UN.

But 200,000 more eke out an existence outside the camps, in a desperately poor part of Bangladesh, with no official documentation, and no prospect of employment.

In the past they have made their way to the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia, in search of work, as many Bangladeshis do.

They could do that because it was relatively easy to obtain Bangladeshi passports. But heightened security concerns in Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia over Islamic extremism have made it far more difficult for the stateless Rohingya to travel.

Rare publicity

Instead they have been making their way to Malaysia by boat.

There are already around 20,000 Rohingya in Malaysia, and the UN has had some success in protecting them from deportation.

Many who make the perilous journey at sea come close to death

The job prospects there are better than Bangladesh, and this slim hope of a better life is what is now driving thousands to take the risky journey across the Andaman Sea.

Inevitably some have landed in Thailand instead. Others have been intercepted by the Thai navy once they entered its territorial waters, which lie en route to Malaysia.

Networks of brokers have grown to cash in on this hope; they charge up to $800 (£547) to make the trip in rickety and overcrowded boats.

Shortages of food and higher prices over the past year in northern Rakhine state are also driving more people to flee.

Of the Rohingya survivors being washed up in Indonesia and the Andaman Islands after being set adrift by the Thai security forces, some left Bangladesh, some left Burma, and a few had been rounded up in Thailand after living there for some time.

The scandal over Thailand's treatment of the Rohingya has at least brought their plight some rare publicity.

It has also brought home to Thailand and Burma's other neighbours that the unending repression inside Burma affects them far more than anyone else, and that the Rohingya are a regional problem which requires a concerted regional response.

Whatever horrors they may have endured recently in the Andaman Sea, the flow of Rohingya boat people is unlikely to stop.

[beej]

Above would lead me to believe they have a strong case for asylum.

[Joopjip]

So is the only humane option for a country with neighbours like Burma be to set up refugee camps? I'm a regular donator for UNHCR but honestly I think it doesn't make sense to feed refugees when your own people are in poverty. And I thought beggers cannot be choosers but these people are having kids also because birth control is against their religion so now we also have to raise their kids. They don't even appreciate our help enough to not have sex. I feel like because we're nice we keep getting bullied and all the responsibilities thrown at.

What are you going to do if you're the Thai navy? Those people have no right to live here we're clear on that. Are you going to spend more tax money to hire officers to watch them or something? Human rights are pretty expensive and it's easy for rich countries to talk about.

[LakeGeneve]

Loburt I am a little suprised at how forgiving you are but I agree much is not still clear about the actual groups. Firstly, it doesn't really matter if they are asylum seekers (refugee is not the correct term until any claims are assessed & they are accorded that status under the Ref. Convention), economic migrants, people being trafficked or fishermen lost at sea.

It doesnt really matter who they are. You CANNOT just tow people out to sea and send them on their way. It is indefensible under any circumstances.

I did not say that towing them out to sea was the right thing to do, so don't suggest or imply in any way that I did.

I clearly wrote that there is "no excuse" for that.

Please read what I actually wrote.

Yes I did read what you said. In 33 lines the one statement expressing concern about the practice of dealing with people in the manner alleged was;

There is no excuse for pushing people out to sea in the manner that was done, but how many people is Thailand supposed to take?

and I did not say that you said it was the right thing to do JUST that I was "a little surprised at how forgiving you are". In the context where you state in the same sentence that there is "no excuse" and then "but how many people is Thailand supposed to take" you do seem to be rather unconcerned about an appalling inhumane allegation and a blatant disregard for due process under thailands laws.

In terms of persecution and gender there is a wealth of history of groups fleeing where males are sent first before and families follow later especially with muslim groups. This is an accepted pattern in some refugee movements eg. Afghans and Iraqis. Each movement is unique.

These flows of Rohingya boat people have been going on for several years now, as you have noted, and we have yet to see flows of families following.

I also notice that Indonesia's reaction to the boat people, until two days ago, was that they were illegal migrants looking for work, and they were being detained at a naval base and would be deported. Malaysia also has a record of deporting them as illegals.

Now, because of international pressure, the Indonesians say they will re-examine the situation. International pressure is good. This issue needs to be re-examined, and as the Thais have called for, in a regional forum. It's a regional problem.

But at this point in time, I'm not convinced these people qualify as refugees/asylum seekers.

Yes it is a regional problem which requires a regional solution and most likely no country really wants to deal with it. The Indonesians have made themselves look a whole lot better, (I think more from domestic pressure than international if you read the Indonesia language press and which also gives thai authorities a bad name) than Thailand in how they handled the arrivals regardless of how they thereafter wish to catagorise the Rohingya arrivals.

The fundamental principle is that ANY arrivals have be processed and determinations made in accordance with Thais laws and international standards. This was obviously not done according to what has been alleged.

It is a very complex issue and yes will not be easy to solve when one looks at the fact it has been in existence for many years. However, the sooner that thai security authorities adhere to basic standards, ensure due process and treat people with dignity; the better for all concerned.

Well,I agree but it seems that they have already changed the way they are handling it. What I originally took issue with, and prompted me to post, was that this change was just being done for "PR." And that the Thais are just consistently and unfailingly bad in dealing with refugees or illegals.

I disagree. The facts don't support that. As I wrote before, there are instances of Thailand doing terrible things to refugees/illegals, and also instances of Thailand showing great compassion. Human Rights Watch calls Thailand's record "mixed", and that is accurate.

You use the word "the Thais" is such a sweeping & generalised manner which I think ignores the reality - which you know more than most - of a diverse group of govt and local officials, some good and caring and some engaging in appalling acts of mistreatment for their owns ends. Yes Thailand does have a mixed record but I don't think anyone said that Thailand, "consistently and unfailingly bad in dealing with refugees or illegals". We would all agree that standards could improve would we not?

The policy on how to handle people coming across the borders does come from ISOC. But the national ISOC is chaired by the Prime Minister. In all likelihood, the policy of turning them out to sea came from previous administrations. I had read somewhere that it was a policy instituted under Samak, but I don't know that to be a fact.

This story broke when the current administration had been in office just over a month. I doubt they were even aware this was going on. Once they were confronted with it, they made sure the way of dealing with it changed.

Whether or not they can or are willing to hold anyone accountable for what happened is another matter. But Democrat administrations have a clear record of handling refugees/asylum seekers/illegal immigrants in a more humane manner than the Chavalit/Thaksin/Samak crew. It's not perfect, but it's clearly better. So I don't think their reaction was just a matter of PR.

I think most neutral observers would subscribe to the view that it was done for PR given that cameras were there but that it may also represent an acknowledgment that past practices in this case have been changed. I dont at all blame the Dems as I am sure that no one in BKK had any idea what was going on in Ranong. And I would not even think the previous govt knew what was going on but it is only speculation on my part. Responsibility, as you rightly point out is with ISOC overall and with the senior military figures in the region.

[Loburt]

Loburt I am a little suprised at how forgiving you are but I agree much is not still clear about the actual groups. Firstly, it doesn't really matter if they are asylum seekers (refugee is not the correct term until any claims are assessed & they are accorded that status under the Ref. Convention), economic migrants, people being trafficked or fishermen lost at sea.

It doesnt really matter who they are. You CANNOT just tow people out to sea and send them on their way. It is indefensible under any circumstances.

I did not say that towing them out to sea was the right thing to do, so don't suggest or imply in any way that I did.

I clearly wrote that there is "no excuse" for that.

Please read what I actually wrote.

Yes I did read what you said. In 33 lines the one statement expressing concern about the practice of dealing with people in the manner alleged was;

There is no excuse for pushing people out to sea in the manner that was done, but how many people is Thailand supposed to take?

and I did not say that you said it was the right thing to do JUST that I was "a little surprised at how forgiving you are". In the context where you state in the same sentence that there is "no excuse" and then "but how many people is Thailand supposed to take" you do seem to be rather unconcerned about an appalling inhumane allegation and a blatant disregard for due process under thailands laws.

Your belief that I "seem unconcerned about an appalling inhumane allegation" is just that - your belief.

Considering that 98% of the posts in this thread are denunciations of the Thais for treating "refugees" inhumanely, I did not feel the need to write reams on the same theme. Any decent person would feel appalled at what has happened to some of these people.

I did feel the need to show there are more dimensions to this situation than most posters are acknowledging. Sorry if my particular soapbox isn't your preferred make and model, but I'm not here to pass your arbitrary moral tests.

"How many people is Thailand supposed to take" is a legitimate question. It's not an excuse for pushing people out to sea.

The Rohingya are certainly a persecuted people in Burma. But there are millions of people in Burma from many ethnic groups living in conditions that are unjust, a times horrific and qualify as persecution. Thailand has accepted hundreds of thousands of them. Thailand simply can't accept them all.

Why aren't the Rohingya going to Bangladesh? For many years that is where they have fled to. Has something changed in Bangladesh? Are the Bangladeshis now unwilling to accept them and rounding up Rohingya and sending them back to Burma? (And where is the media coverage of this?) Is it a matter of job prospects being better in other countries?

You all feel they are refugees? Okay. Let's round up every Rohingya in Thailand without permission to be here, and set up a refugee camp in Ranong or on one of the Thai islands, paid for by the UNHCR and monitored by the UNHCR.

They can stay there until a third country is willing to accept them or the situation in their homeland improves and they can go back. That is what happens to other refugees.

If that is the fate that awaits them, rather than the prospect of working illegally, I wonder how many will continue to come.

[drlovelife8]

One of the reasons I like Thailand is that it has always tried to put it's own people first as do a few others which then get tagged with being draconian . As the UK used to do for those who paid in to the system. But those days have gone for many countries and people cry asylum at every opportunity just making it harder for the real ones to get the help they need.

Towing the out so sea is a bit harsh to say the least but you know what..... **** em, this story isn't as clear cut as it seems. It was a people smuggling operation. As someone said........ " Where were all the women??"

If Thailand doesn't want them they shouldn't have to keep them.

I remember Australia threatening to blow up a boat of Africans a few years ago because it was full of illegal immos and they simple didn't want them there..............

That boat never docked in OZZ!!

Good on em I say

[Neo]

I remember Australia threatening to blow up a boat of Africans a few years ago because it was full of illegal immos and they simple didn't want them there..............

That boat never docked in OZZ!!

Good on em I say

Australia did worse than that. The Aussie police were sinking refugee boats full of men women and children as they left from Indonesia. How did they know how to find the boats? Police agents were posing as people smugglers. So they even got paid by the people they were drowning. Nice.

Makes the Rohingya situation look like 4 star hospitality.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/oct2002/siev-o21.shtml

[drlovelife8]

I remember Australia threatening to blow up a boat of Africans a few years ago because it was full of illegal immos and they simple didn't want them there..............

That boat never docked in OZZ!!

Good on em I say

Australia did worse than that. The Aussie police were sinking refugee boats full of men women and children as they left from Indonesia. How did they know how to find the boats? Police agents were posing as people smugglers. So they even got paid by the people they were drowning. Nice.

Makes the Rohingya situation look like 4 star hospitality.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/oct2002/siev-o21.shtml

preemptive strike????

We these people going to Ozz regardless??

**** the bed, even I can't justify that action.... but if they had just blown them up in Ozzy waters but not set them up in the first place I could forgive it... assuming them gave them a chance to turn back that is.