Moken are not Rohingya: “Stateless at Sea” | a Human Rights Watch fiction?

Human Rights Watch just released a report on the Moken from Myanmar and Thailand:

Stateless at Sea | Human Rights Watch.

Once again, HRW misses a complex reality to jump into alarmist statements, some of which we answer here.

“… the Moken have maintained a self-sufficient, nomadic way of life along the Andaman coast for hundreds of year”

“The Moken face deepening poverty, marginalization, and discrimination”

These two ideas of “self-sufficiency” on the one hand and “poverty” on the other – implicitely opposing tradition to modernity – give raise to a complex debate given that, for example, ‘debt’ is a cultural necessity of the Moken’s “nomad choice” and is the expression of a patronage system that is all too well known in Asia. Their livelihood has been weakened by the disappearance of the relationship with their ‘patrons’ (locally known as ‘taukay’) who protected the Moken (and thus their investments) by giving them the freedom to hunt and gather as they please on the condition that they provide them with marketable products (freedom always come at a price). Whenever foreigners approach them, the latter take on the ‘noble cause’ of ‘releasing’ the Moken from this financial burden and from this relationship which they consider as being a form of alienation or even slavery, whereas it is at the very centre of their freedom and of their system of inter-relationships with the outside world. Even if they were to change or had to change, it would take time for them to adjust their existing behaviours to international standards.

We are trying to accommodate the notion of Moken ‘independence’ by including them as essential actors in the museum project we are developing. In so doing, we hope to find an answer to the issue of what their place will be in the future of their nation. While we are uncertain of whether we will succeed or not, we are working very hard to find alternative systems to these patronage relationships, which prevent them from fully expressing themselves (even though they help to maintain their freedom) and are collapsing (as the Burmese are poor and resources are scarce). In this regard, we already have some proposals.

“But the majority of Moken children living in Burma do not attend school at all.”

Their refusal to go to school, which is inscribed in their myths but to which there are also pragmatic explanations related to everyday life, is another issue we are trying to address, through apprenticeship for example. The Burmese parents of mixed Moken children know all too well that school will only make their children feel like second-class citizens. As a result, they would rather preserve a Moken tradition that values their children more. For us, this is an unavoidable lever in the development of our museum project.

“The Moken living on Burma’s islands and waters are largely unregistered and, because of their nomadism, many are not considered citizens by the Burmese government.”

As for citizenship, it is indeed a real issue, but the reality is that Burmese-Moken mixed heritage, which has been a success in terms of integration (although it does not fully guard them from abuses) has resulted in providing a ‘choice’ to the Moken, most of whom had until now left most things under the control of the dominating forces (husbands, Burmese village heads, census-conducting administrative officers)… as usual. The latter have integrated them into the nation as ‘Burmese’, even though they benefit from having a recognised ‘nationality’. The museum would thus serve as a reminder of the existence of this population among the 135 recognised ‘races’ of Myanmar. It would be up to the Moken to decide how they wish to reconfigure their own identity within the nation, utilising the tools we provide them with.

“Human Rights Watch found that the navy committed a pattern of abuses, including extortion, bribery, arbitrary arrest, and confiscation of property”

“Ironically, the Thai government’s creation of national parks in the Andaman Sea, ostensibly aimed at protecting the environment the Moken have helped to preserve, is seriously affecting the Moken lifestyle due to new laws and regulations that restrict their traditional practices”

Abuses against them committed by this party or the other are a reality, a reality that is marginal at present. The military, on the whole, have been using the Moken (either as cross-border smugglers, since Moken boats do not get inspected, or by expelling them by force from certain islands for pearl farming) or have even tried to assemble them by force (though they have never managed to do so). They were surely mistreated, yet certainly less than other minorities. The Moken of Thailand have suffered far more from the actions of Thai National Park authorities who would not hesitate to put them in jail for whatever reason, in a country where no citizen would even consider marrying a ‘savage’.

“In addition to government distrust and discrimination, the Moken often face exploitation from land-based communities, but are unable to seek redress through national laws and policies.”

Since their appearance (one of the components of our research is to determine the conditions of their emergence), their freedom has always come at a price, having been hunted for slavery (the memory of which is still alive in their myths, but a slavery that has ‘triggered’ their ‘integral’ nomadism, one might say), having undergone raids by powerful forces (authorities, governments, the Japanese, Thai and Burmese fishermen…). The Moken have developed a whole series of strategies to address these threats (and they are not the only ones in the region).

The museum itself is an idea that came from the Burmese who wanted to preserve Moken knowledge, as they are well aware that the Moken are likely to remain second-class citizens in Myanmar. They know that their ethnicity and their sense of belonging must be preserved. For the time being, they have been integrating some of the Moken into the new villages, and it is true, administratively speaking, that the Moken are disappearing as a recognised ‘race’. But this is the springboard from which the Burmese have understood that they must exist otherwise. We must let their interactions be, so that people can find ways to come together and share amongst one another. We must follow the constructive steps of interrelationships and mutual respect. This is the goal of the museum.

There was some predation (divers, the arrival of compressors and large-scale fishing) in regards to the resources that were once the guarantors of their independence, via the patron-client system, which forced the Moken to transform their society (disappearance of their traditional boats and some gathering practices), but the nomads are a people who have been adapting to historical pressures for centuries (the Japanese during the war, the British who sold them off at auctions, pirate raids…) and have yet managed to survive. The ultimate choice thus lies with them.

Yes, nationality is an important issue, but the recognition of their expertise among the Burmese is even more important.

Yes, the problem of resources is crucial, not just for the Moken, but it requires them to adapt to a new environment.

Within these few lines, we would like to express that the report that has been written was drawn upon bases that are foreign to the reality of the situation. They show the Moken as victims, which they are not. However, it is a role that the Moken have always mastered to perfection so dominant populations would not consider them as a threat. The Moken are not Rohingya.

It is easier to make assessments according to pre-established frames of reference than to actually go and understand what is really happening. The same goes for the World Bank who decided to help the archipelago in developing the area’s infrastructure (supplying concrete) because the “population is scattered”. Obviously they are scattered! They are nomads and fishermen…!!! In terms of resources, we may also point criticism to the United States for ordering 18 million dollars worth of sea produce (the exact figure escapes us) to reward Myanmar for its good political behaviour. So one can imagine the number of tonnes of dynamite exploding in the waters of the archipelago and the hundreds of trawlers treading the depths to meet this demand. This is just some of the many things we have to say. Should anyone wishes to comment on this post, we are opened to discussion.