“Pro-Democracy” Groups Behind Myanmar Refugee Attacks

Supporters of Aung San Suu Kyi, leaders of the “Saffron Revolution,” leading ethnic cleansing of Myanmar refugees.

Tony Cartalucci


October 29, 2012

People don’t just come out into the streets and begin murdering each
other. There are always instigators on one side, perhaps both, leading
the anger and violence. In the case of targeted Muslim Rohingya refugees
in Myanmar’s Rakhine state, those leading the the violence against
them, which most recently involved 26 killed and 2,000 Rohingya homes
destroyed, have been identified. 

While the Associated Press (AP) features grainy photos of monks outside
the city hall in Yangon, Myanmar, claiming that it is a rally “against
violence,” the signs themselves tell a different tale. One enumerates,
in English, the demands of the “monks.” The sign includes:

1. Protect Rakhine People from the Dangers of Islamic Extremism.

2. Army Must stop Shooting the Ethnic People.

3. We Arakanese Don’t Want to Live With Extreme Bengalis Anymore.

4. Mr. President Should be Decisive on the Issue of Arakan. 

5. Drive all illegal Bengalis out of the Land of Myanmar.

6. All Ethnic People of Myanmar Should be United. 

The sign continues, but is obstructed in all the shots provided by AP. All of the news stories featuring the picture
do not mention any of the enumerated points on the sign, and instead
claim, “Myanmar Buddhist monks offer prayers Thursday during a rally of
more than 100 people protesting recent violence.”

By “Army Must stop Shooting the Ethnic People,” the protesters mean the
army should stop firing on their vigilantes for attempting to eradicate
the refugees, as the points on the sign enumerate clearly they are the
united ethnic people of Myanmar, and the refugees are “illegal

Image: Praying for genocide. While Associated Press claims
these protesters are demonstrating against ethnic violence, the sign
they carry clearly states that they seek the expulsion of the refugees
from Myanmar, and are merely protesting against the Myanmar Army’s use
of force to protect them from attacks that have left scores dead and
thousands of refugee homes destroyed. 


In the summer and early fall of 2012 when this wave of violence had again erupted, AFP reported in their article, “Monks stage anti-Rohingya march in Myanmar,”
that the marching “monks” supported President Thein Sein’s plan to expel
the Rohingya, before paradoxically admitting that Thein Sein has accused
the marchers of “kindling hatred toward the Rohingya.”

AFP, in a grave lapse of professional journalism, refers to the leader of this movement as merely
“a monk named Wirathu.”

However, this isn’t merely “a monk named Wirathu,” but “Sayadaw”
(venerable teacher) Wirathu who has led many of “democratic champion”
Aung San Suu Kyi’s political street campaigns and is often referred to
by the Western media as an “activist monk.”

In March of this year, Wirathu had led a rally
calling for the release of so-called “political prisoners,” so
designated by US State Department funded faux-NGOs. Wirathu himself was
in prison, according to AFP, for inciting hatred against Muslims, until recently released as part of an amnesty, an amnesty US State Department-funded (page 15, .pdf) Democratic Voice of Burma claims concerned only “political prisoners.”

Image: Real monks don’t do politics. The “venerable” Wirathu
(front, left) leads a rally for “political prisoners” loyal to Aung San
Suu Kyi’s “pro-democracy” movement in March, 2012. Wirathu himself has
been often portrayed as an “activist monk” and a “political prisoner”
who spent years in prison. In reality, he was arrested for his role in
violent sectarian clashes in 2003, while Suu Kyi’s “pro-democracy” front
is actually US-funded sedition. Wirathua has picked up right where he left off in 2003, and is now leading anti-Rohingya rallies across the country.


Human Rights Watch itself, in its attempt to memorialize the struggle of “Buddhism and activism in Burma” (.pdf), 
admits that Wirathu was arrested in 2003 and sentenced to 25 years in
prison along with other “monks” for their role in violent clashes
between “Buddhists and Muslims” (page 67, .pdf). This would make Wirathu and his companions violent criminals, not “political prisoners.”

While Western news agencies have attempted to spin the recent violence
as a new phenomenon implicating Aung San Suu Kyi’s political foot
soldiers as genocidal bigots, in reality, the sectarian nature of her
support base has been back page news for years. AFP’s recent but
uncharacteristically honest portrayal of Wirathu, with an attempt to
conceal his identity and role in Aung San Suu Kyi’s “Saffron” political
machine, illustrates the quandary now faced by Western propagandists as
the violence flares up again, this time in front of a better informed

Image: An alleged monk, carries an umbrella with Aung San Suu
Kyi’s image on it. These so-called monks have played a central role in
building Suu Kyi’s political machine, as well as maintaining over a
decade of genocidal, sectarian violence aimed at Myanmar’s ethnic
minorities. Another example of US “democracy promotion” and tax dollars
at work.


During 2007’s “Saffron Revolution,” these same so-called “monks” took to
the streets in a series of bloody anti-government protests, in support
of Aung San Suu Kyi and her Western-contrived political movement.
HRW would specifically enumerate support provided to Aung San Suu Kyi’s
movement by these organizations, including the Young Monks Union
(Association), now leading violence and calls for ethnic cleansing
across Myanmar.

The UK Independent  in their article, “Burma’s monks call for Muslim community to be shunned,”
mentions the Young Monks Association by name as involved in
distributing flyers recently, demanding people not to associate with
ethnic Rohingya, and attempting to block humanitarian aid from reaching
Rohingya camps.

The Independent also notes calls for ethnic cleansing made by leaders of the 88 Generation Students group (BBC profile here) – who also played a pivotal role in the pro-Suu Kyi 2007 protests. “Ashin” Htawara, another “monk activist” who considers Aung San Suu Kyi,  his “special
leader” and greeted her with flowers for her Oslo Noble Peace Prize
address earlier this year, stated at an event in London that the
Rohingya should be sent “back to their native land.” 

The equivalent of Ku Klux Klan racists
demanding that America’s black population be shipped back to Africa, the
US State Department’s “pro-democratic” protesters in Myanmar have been
revealed as habitual, violent bigots with genocidal tendencies and enumerated designs. Their
recent violence also casts doubts on Western narratives portraying the
2007 “Saffron Revolution’s” death toll as exclusively the work of
government security operations. 

Like their US-funded (and armed) counterparts in Syria,
many fighting openly under the flag of sectarian extremism held aloft
by international terrorist organization Al Qaeda, we see the absolute
moral bankruptcy of Myanmar’s “pro-democracy” movement that has, up
until now, been skillfully covered up by endless torrents of Western
propaganda – Aung San Suu Kyi’s Nobel Peace Prize and a recent showering of Western bestowed awards, all being part of the illusion. 

Sectarian Violence, Destabilization: What’s in it for the West?

In “Myanmar (Burma) “Pro-Democracy” Movement a Creation of Wall Street & London,”
it was documented that Suu Kyi and organizations supporting her,
including local propaganda fronts like the New Era Journal, the
Irrawaddy, and the Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB) radio, have received
millions of dollars a year from the Neo-Conservative chaired National Endowment for Democracy, convicted criminal and Wall Street speculator George Soros’ Open Society Institute, and the US State Department itself, citing Britain’s own “Burma Campaign UK (.pdf).”


The Myitsone Dam, on its way to being the 15th largest in the world
until construction was halted in September by a campaign led byWall Street-puppet Aung San Suu Kyi, a stable of US-funded NGOs,and a terrorist campaignexecuted by armed groups operating in Kachin State, Myanmar.


And not only does the US State Department in tandem with Western
corporate media provide Aung San Suu Kyi extensive political, financial,
and rhetorical backing, they provide operational capabilities as well,
allowing her opposition movement to achieve Western objectives
throughout Myanmar. The latest achievement of this operational
capability successfully blocked the development of Myanmar’s
infrastructure by halting a joint China-Mynamar dam project
that would have provided thousands of jobs, electricity, state-revenue,
flood control, and enhanced river navigation for millions. Suu Kyi and
her supporting network of NGOs, as well as armed militants in Myanmar’s
northern provinces conducted a coordinated campaign exploiting both
“environmental” and “human rights” concerns that in reality resulted in
Myanmar’s continual economic and social stagnation.

The ultimate goal of course is to effect regime change not only in
Myanmar, but to create a united Southeast Asian front against China in
pursuit of long-documented plans to encircle and contain the emerging

As reported in June, 2011’s “Collapsing China,”
as far back as 1997 there was talk about developing an effective
containment strategy coupled with the baited hook of luring China into
its place amongst the “international order.” Just as in these 1997
talking-points where author and notorious Neo-Con policy maker Robert
Kagan described the necessity of using America’s Asian “allies” as part
of this containment strategy, Clinton goes through a list of regional
relationships the US is trying to cultivate to maintain “American
leadership” in Asia.

Image: (Top) The “Lilliputians”
though small in stature were collectively able to tie down the larger
Gulliver from the literary classic “Gulliver’s Travels.” In the same
manner, the US wants to use smaller Southeast Asian nations to “tie
down” the larger China.


The US Army’s Strategic Studies Institute 2006 publication, “String of pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China’s Rising Power Across the Asian Littoral
details US geopolitical awareness of China’s growing influence
throughout Asia and enumerates a plan of action to balk it while
maintaining American preeminence. While Kagan’s paper details a broader
geopolitical strategy, the SSI report specifically mentions where China
is expanding its influence.

In defining China’s “String of Pearls” it states:

Each “pearl” in the “String of Pearls” is a nexus of Chinese geopolitical influence or military
4 Hainan Island, with recently upgraded military facilities, is a
“pearl.” An upgraded airstrip on Woody Island, located in the Paracel
archipelago 300 nautical miles east of Vietnam, is a “pearl.” A
container shipping facility in Chittagong, Bangladesh, is a “pearl.”
Construction of a deep water port in Sittwe, Myanmar, is a “pearl,” as
is the construction of a navy base in Gwadar, Pakistan. 5 Port and
airfield construction projects, diplomatic ties, and force modernization
form the essence of China’s “String of Pearls.” The “pearls” extend
from the coast of mainland China through the littorals of the South
China Sea, the Strait of Malacca, across the Indian Ocean, and on to the
littorals of the Arabian Sea and Persian Gulf. China is building
strategic relationships and developing a capability to establish a
forward presence along the sea lines of communication (SLOCs) that
connect China to the Middle East (see Figure 1).

Image: Figure 1. From SSI’s 2006 “String of Pearls” report
detailing a strategy of containment for China. While “democracy,”
“freedom,” and “human rights” will mask the ascension of Aung San Suu Kyi and
others into power, it is part of a region-wide campaign to overthrow
nationalist elements and install client regimes in order to encircle and contain China.
Violence in areas like Sittwe, Rakhine Myanmar, or Gwadar Baluchistan
Pakistan, are not coincidences and documented evidence indicates immense
Western backing for armed opposition groups.


The report was written in 2006 – and clearly the West has gone through great lengths
since then to destabilize, neutralize, or isolate from China’s
influence each and every one of these “pearls.” Indeed, the state of
Rakhine in southwest Myanmar is being developed by China as stated in
the SSI report. The city of Sittwe is the site of a Chinese-built port,
and Kyaukpyu is the future site for the terminal of a trans-Myanmar oil
pipeline linking Chinese oil tankers incoming from the Middle East
directly with China’s Yunnan province, negating the lengthy trip around
the Strait of Malacca and across the South China Sea.

By destabilizing Rakhine state, either through this current violence, or
by “radicalizing” groups within the Rohingya and expanding the violence
further still, the West can ensure that progress is slow, or all
together brought to a halt, just as it has with Chinese projects up
country, or even abroad in nations like war-torn Libya or Pakistan’s now destabilized Baluchistan province. The SSI report also mentions Chittagong, Bangladesh, which also, coincidentally, has been dragged into neighboring Myanmar’s violence.

A library of policy papers detailing the US’ strategy vis-a-vis China’s
emergence is available for the public to read. However, these papers are
written in academic English and require demanding prerequisites across a
variety of disciplines to understand.  It also requires effort greatly
exceeding that needed to merely consider and accept base arguments made
by prominent and prolific Western media services. There is always more
to a story than mere superficial religious or ethnic differences – and
if a news story fails to address this, it has failed to report the