[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’ INTERNATIONAL ILONGGO ‘ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=” subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”]
BY JED JALECO DEL ROSARIO
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=”]
ONE OF the most popular principles of modern liberal thought is the end of tribalism in the 21st century. By tribalism, I mean ethnic, religious, sectarian and occasionally ideological differences that manifest themselves as conflicts of interest.
Western liberals in the US and Europe would like to believe that such tribalism no longer exists in this day and age, or at least, it shouldn’t exist in their countries, and yet it does, and one of the best examples of tribalism lately is the so-called ethnic cleansing in Myanmar.
The history of the Rohingya and its Burmese and Rakhine neighbors are too long and complicated to relate in this article. It is enough to point out, however, that the conflict is decades-, if not centuries-old. In fact, the Rohingya exodus from Myanmar can be traced back to the Rakhine state riots in 2012, which in turn can be traced back to ethno-religious conflicts centuries earlier.
The Buddhists in Myanmar claim that in Rohingya-dominated territories, Buddhists are oppressed by Muslims, while the Rohingya claim that they’re the ones being oppressed. The truth, however, is that people are rarely innocent in such conflicts, even if both sides insist that they are on the side of angels and that their enemies are devils.
The only reason why people are shedding crocodile tears over the Rohingya is that they are now being portrayed as victims. If the Rohingya had won and the Rakhine lost, they would be the victims.
In the war of words and public sympathy, playing the victim offers the highest returns on investment, because it creates a narrative of good and evil out of situations which are driven by tribal self-interest. The so-called ethnic cleansing in Rohingya is merely the latest phase in a conflict that has been around for a long time. So focusing on the atrocities which are taking place in the present obfuscates the historical context which drives the conflicts in the Rakhine state.
My position on the whole Myanmar issue is this, “It’s none of our business. It’s no one’s business.”
Isolationism / non-interventionism works. And Western commentators should focus on their own ethnic and demographic problems, of which there are plenty.
We can, however, draw certain lessons from the conflict in Rakhine, and the lesson is that tribalism still exists in the 21st century, and it will continue to exist until humanity itself is destroyed.
Humans form tribes. Sometimes, those tribes cooperate, but most of the time, they engage in competition. Myanmar’s “ethnic cleansing” of its Rohingya Muslim population is an example of tribes taking competition to an extreme conclusion, ethnic separation. Whether this separation is done peacefully or tragically, the outcome remains the same.
Westerners and Progressives would like to believe that tribalism no longer exist, or that it should not exist in the 21st century. The latest events in Myanmar show that such beliefs are ultimately wishful thinking. (jdr456@gmail.com/PN)
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
