WUNRN
http://www.wunrn.com
 
UNIFEM - Gender & Internal Displacement
http://www.womenwarpeace.org/issues/displacement/displacement.htm
 
*Up to eighty percent of displaced people worldwide are women and children.
 
*Although some women actively choose to leave their home communities, flight is often precipitated by extreme sexual harassment, gender-based violence or severe sex discrimination. Displaced women often face extreme discrimination throughout flight, settlement and return. Women and girls are at high risk for human rights abuses as their homes, communities and support systems disintegrate.
__________________________________________________________________
 
http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004CE90B/(httpCountrySummaries)/F24A7D089FB6F2CDC12572A0003CE77B?OpenDocument&count=10000
 
BURMA/MYANMAR - INTERNAL DISPLACEMENT - GENDER
 
"Internally displaced people also face a range of other protection problems such as lack of personal documentation, insecure land tenure and threats of sexual abuse. Local and international non-governmental organisations have documented widespread and continuing sexual violence against ethnic minority women by the military in Burma. Documentation gathered from Karen, Shan and Arakan states concludes that sexual violence is being systematically used as a weapon against the ethnic minority population."
 
___________________________________________________________________________

Burma: A Worsening Crisis of Internal Displacement

The situation of internal displacement in Burma continues to worsen despite increased pressure on the military government to end its blatant human rights abuses and to allow humanitarian access to conflict-affected populations. The largest concentration of internally displaced people (IDPs) is found among the Karen, Karenni, Shan and Mon ethnic groups in eastern Burma. As of October 2006, it was estimated that at least 500,000 people were internally displaced in eastern Burma, either living in temporary sites in ceasefire areas, in hiding close to their villages or in relocation sites. However, this is a conservative estimate as no information exists for several areas. The displacement crisis is currently most acute in the Karen state of Burma where thousands of civilians are being displaced by the Burmese army which has launched a major offensive against insurgent groups. In other parts of Burma, no estimate exists of the number of people who have fled due to forced labour and other coercive government policies. Displacement due to large-scale development projects is on the increase, one current example being the forced relocation of dozens of villages along the Salween River. In addition, hundreds of thousands more have been displaced in schemes to resettle the urban poor.

The human rights situation in Burma has been on the UN Security Council agenda several times during the last year, but in January 2007, China and Russia vetoed a US sponsored resolution addressing the situation in the country. International and regional actors should take every opportunity to raise the need for humanitarian access with the military regime and should develop a common policy vis-à-vis the government in order to improve protection and assistance to Burma’s internally displaced.

Background: ethnic minorities systematically targeted by military

Following independence in 1948, Burma was plunged into a civil war between the central government and various armed opposition groups. The most protracted armed conflict has been between the Burman-controlled state and ethnic non-Burman nationalities demanding increased political autonomy from the centre.

The current military regime, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), has been in power since 1988, renaming the country Myanmar the following year. In 1990, the National League for Democracy (NLD), led by Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, won an overwhelming majority in multi-party elections. She was prevented from taking power by the military and has spent most of the years since the elections under house arrest. The military regime has since stayed in control by crushing any sign of political opposition. Repression has been particularly harsh in areas populated by the Karen, Karenni, Shan and Mon ethnic groups. The Burmese army has made significant territorial gains in these states during the past decade. It has also increased its capacity by doubling the number of troops deployed throughout the ethnic minority-populated states to fight against insurgency groups.

Since 1989, 17 informal ceasefires have been agreed between the regime and ethnic minority armies, but the eastern border with Thailand remains a conflict zone. A few ethnic insurgent groups remain active, including the Shan State Army-South (SSA S), the Karenni National Progressive Party (KNPP), and the Karen National Union (KNU), through its armed wing, the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA). Despite a 2003 ceasefire between the KNU and the government, fighting began again in September 2005 in Pegu Division between government forces and the KNLA and spread to many other areas of northern Karen State during 2006 (USDOS, 6 March 2007).

While the regime has pledged democratic reform and respect for human rights, this is widely seen as empty rhetoric, especially after a hard-line faction led by Lt-General Soe Win ousted and replaced the more reform-friendly Prime Minister Khin Nyunt in October 2004. Demands from Burma’s ethnic minorities have been largely excluded from the National Convention agenda, which has provoked several among them to officially withdraw from the process (HRW, 2006; UNCHR, 7 February 2006; AFP, 31 January 2006; ALTSEAN, 16 February 2005). In November 2005, the government announced the relocation of several ministries from the capital in Rangoon to a “command and control centre” near Pyinmana, in southern Mandalay Division some 320 kilometres north of Rangoon (UNCHR, 7 February 2006, para. 36).

Causes of displacement


Internal displacement has in particular affected the eastern border areas, and especially the Karen, Karenni, Shan and Mon ethnic groups. Human rights violations are the single most important reason for displacement in eastern Burma, more so than fighting between the Burmese and rebel armies. In most parts of Burma, the primary agent of displacement is the Burmese army, also called the Tatmadaw. In conflict areas, the army has for decades implemented a so-called “Four Cuts Policy” which aims to consolidate control in ethnic minority areas by eliminating the access of armed opposition groups to new recruits, information, supplies and financial support. In implementing this strategy, the Burmese army is accused of widespread human rights abuses such as forced relocation, expropriation of land and livestock, extortion, forced labour, threats and intimidations, sexual abuse and other forms of violence (UNHRC, 12 February 2007; AI, September 2005).

As the army substantially expanded its control over ethnic minority areas during the 1990s, more than 3,000 villages have been destroyed and about one million people forcibly relocated to government-controlled areas (TBBC, October 2006, p.3). In Shan state, approximately two-thirds of the villages situated in the hills were relocated to lowland areas from 1996 onwards, and villages are still being destroyed today (SRDC, 2006, p.3; S.H.A.N., 7 March 2006).

Rebel groups have also been accused of forced displacement. During 2005, ethnic armed groups, including the SSA-S, KNU and KNPP were reported to have committed human rights abuses, although to a lesser extent than the government army (AI, 7 September 2005; UN CHR, 7 February 2006; USDOS, 8 March 2006). Other major protection issues in eastern Burma are the forced recruitment of soldiers and indiscriminate use of landmines by both the army and ethnic rebel groups.

In minority areas, land confiscation, forced relocation and forced labour due to state-sponsored development projects are the main causes of displacement. Land confiscation by the government takes place throughout the country, often in order to increase control over ethnic populations and to exploit natural resources. Relocated populations are commonly subjected to forced labour by the army. In ethnic minority areas, civilians are forced to work on a variety of infrastructure projects, such as building and maintenance of roads, bridges and railways, or are used as porters for the military (AI, September 2005).

Development projects that have led to forced relocation and widespread forced labour among the local population include the Lawpita dam and the Day Loh dam in the Toungoo district. A large hydro-electric project which will lead to the building of four dams along the Salween river in Karen and Shan states, has already led to forced evictions of 60 villages along the river and threatens to displace thousands of people when implementation starts in 2007. Other large projects where forced labour has been documented include gas pipelines in the Tenasserim Division and in the Mon state (UNHRC, 12 February para. 61; KDRG, 2006, p.2; TBBC, October 2006, p.18; HRW, June 2005, p.42). Road building and natural resources extraction have led to easier access for the military into ethnic areas which represents an increased threat of human rights abuses against the local population.

Since 1998, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) has continuously documented how forced labour is directly linked to military operations, including the forced recruitment of porters and their use as human mine-sweepers. People who have complained about forced labour practices have reportedly been persecuted and imprisoned. During its session in November 2006, ILO’s Governing Body concluded that forced labour continued to be prevalent in Burma (ILO, March 2007).

Religious persecution in Burma is a problem in areas with ethnic and political conflicts as well. While religious minorities face few restrictions in urban areas, the military regime remains in tight control of religious activities in the border areas (The Christian Post, 11 April 2005). The Muslim population in particular has faced periods of religious intolerance, leading to displacement. Reported incidents have included the burning of entire villages, mosques and houses as well as the killing and wounding of people.

The continued impoverishment of Burmese society has led to more focus on “livelihood migrants” in Burma, people who migrate because they can no longer survive in their home areas due to decades of poor governance and coercive policies such as forced agricultural programmes, forced labour, and forced recruitment to SPDC-run organisations and administrative structures, state-run extortion, looting, and confiscation of land and crops to render the local population more vulnerable. Areas inhabited by the ethnic minority population have especially become underdeveloped compared to the rest of the country with widespread food insecurity and non-availability of public services. Confronted with a steady deterioration of their living conditions, large numbers of people have left the rural areas for other areas in Burma or for neighbouring countries where they live illegally. They normally leave as individuals or in family groups and it is rare that these movements are reported by international organisations. There is a growing number of reports that debate or argue that as their movement is frequently non-voluntary, many should be defined as IDPs according to the definition contained in the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (South, February 2007; KHRG, 23 February 2007; RI, June 2006).

Eastern Burma: thousands newly displaced due to army operations


Internal displacement is relatively well documented in the eastern border areas. Several international and local human rights organisations have reported on the deteriorating human rights conditions in ethnic minority areas bordering Thailand. In areas where data collection has been possible, systematic information-gathering by local NGOs assisting IDPs in Burma through cross-border assistance programmes, and the long-standing effort of the Thailand Burma Border Consortium (TBBC) to compile and analyse these data, have been the basis for annual reports about displacement in eastern Burma.

The areas most severely affected by recent displacement are the Toungoo, Nyaunglebin and Papun districts situated in the northern Karen state and eastern Pegu division where thousands have fled attacks on their villages and widespread human rights abuses such as rape, forced labour, burning of fields and extortion. There has also been a widespread use of landmines to prevent the return of fleeing populations. In eastern Burma, the situation is now so serious that the UN Special Rapporteur has warned of an impending humanitarian crisis if it is not addressed immediately (UNCHR, 12 February 2007).

A year-long military offensive against the KNU had displaced some 27,000 civilians and killed at least 45 people as of November 2006 according to a report by Human Rights Watch (HRW, 30 November 2006).

Burmese military operations continue unabated in the Toungoo district of the Karen state, increasing the pressure on thousands of internally displaced people hiding there. The military have forced villagers to clear wide areas along the sides of roadways, which makes it much harder for displaced families and communities to cross without being spotted and fired upon. As a result the IDPs are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain food and other necessary supplies from surrounding villages. According to the Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG), the military’s objective is to starve displaced villagers out of the hills and into military-controlled villages and relocation sites where they will be cut off from the KNU rebels (KHRG, 19 February 2007). Widespread displacement is also reported from the Nyaunglebin district. Years of heavy militarisation together with mining and dam construction have led to widespread displacement, as documented in a new report focusing on the Shwegyin township. The civilian population is increasingly impoverished due to land confiscations, extortion and forced labour (Earthrights, January 2007).

According to the last survey of the TBBC, at least 500,000 people were displaced in eastern Burma as of October 2006, but this is a conservative estimate as data from several areas are unavailable. The report estimates that 82,000 people were forced to leave their homes as a result of human rights abuses and humanitarian atrocities between October 2005 and October 2006. Over 230 villages were destroyed, forcibly relocated or otherwise abandoned in eastern Burma during the past 12 months, while more than 3,000 villages have been destroyed, relocated or abandoned since 1996. Over one million people are believed to have been displaced from their homes in eastern Burma over the past ten years (TBBC, October 2006, p. 20).

The total number of internally displaced in the area surveyed has decreased by approximately 40,000 over the last year, primarily because IDPs have left the relative safety of the ceasefire zones in the Shan and Karenni states due to a lack of livelihood opportunities. It is not known whether these people have returned to their former homes or whether they are still internally displaced elsewhere in Burma.

The large majority of the internally displaced in eastern Burma, 287,000 people, are in temporary settlements in ceasefire areas controlled by ethnic minority groups, while at least 95,000 civilians remain in hiding and another 118,000 are in relocation sites after being forcibly evicted from their homes by the army (TBBC, October 2006, p. 22).

Internal displacement in other parts of Burma


Far less information exists about displacement outside the area surveyed by TBBC, although anecdotal evidence and informal surveys among Burmese communities in neighbouring countries suggest that displacement is widespread also in other parts of Burma. Studies conducted by human rights groups have estimated at least one million people are displaced countrywide (HRW, June 2005). An unknown number have been compelled to leave their homes due to widespread human rights abuses in areas occupied by the military, development projects that led to widespread eviction of the local population with no or insufficient compensation, and destitution due to failed and forced commercial agriculture imposed by the government. As referred to above, it is increasingly argued that many of those who today are seen to leave for economic reasons in fact have been forced to do so because of a steady deterioration of their living conditions due to coercive government policies and that the number of IDPs in Burma therefore is far higher than what often is stated (South, February 2007; KHRC, 23 February 2007).

At least one million people, some say more than two million people, have crossed the border between Burma and Thailand and reside illegally in the country. Many of them fled Burma due to the human rights abuses in the country, but only some 150,000 are registered in camps (TBBC, July 2006, p.6). Hundreds of thousands have also left for India, Bangladesh, Malaysia and other countries to escape human rights violations and to seek livelihood opportunities.

In western Burma, particularly in Rakhine state, the Muslim Rohingya and other ethnic groups have been displaced as a result of brutal discrimination policies, including the construction of "new villages" for trans-migrants from central and northern Burma. Many of those displaced have fled to Bangladesh, where conditions of asylum are very harsh, and where they face the prospect of forced repatriation (Forum Asia, June 2003; FIDH, 9 March 2004; AI, 19 May 2004).

Human rights abuses in Rakhine state are reported to be on the increase, and the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Myanmar has repeatedly expressed concern about the situation. Discrimination, forced relocations and deliberate deprivation of food and livelihood opportunities increase the risk of further displacement. The NaSaKa, a border task force believed to be under the direct command of the ruling SPDC, is said to be the main perpetrator of abuses against the Rohingya population. Although UNHCR is present on the ground after a mass repatriation in 1994-1995 of Rohingya refugees from Bangladesh, abuses go on unabated (UNHRC, February 2007, para.59; AI, 29 September 2005). There is also regular fighting along the border with India due to offensives against a faction of the rebel National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN), which is fighting for a separate homeland for the Naga ethnic group in India and Burma. However, no information has been found about displacement of the civilian population.

In urban areas, reports of forced relocation have decreased, but the government continues to forcibly relocate households for "security" reasons (USDOS, 6 March 2007). Since the 1950s – and intensifying since the end of the 1980s – whole neighbourhoods, mainly in poor areas, have been forced to move due to “security reasons” or to make way for infrastructure projects, including roads, bridges and “urban development programmes”. Hundreds of thousands of residents of Rangoon and other towns and cities have been moved to “satellite towns” that have been established in recent years (USDOS, 6 March 2007; South, February 2007; KWN, September-October 2003). A sudden move of key government ministries from Rangoon to the small town of Pyinmana in southern Mandalay division has reportedly also led to the forced relocation of surrounding villages and forced labour (UNCHR, 7 February 2006, para. 36).

Internally displaced lack assistance and protection


In eastern Burma, several reports have documented that the internally displaced who live in hiding are particularly vulnerable because of the lack of food and shelter as well as medical care. Many displaced survive due to the work of ethnic community-based organisations that bring in assistance. A large number have to cope with an environment where neither protection, nor assistance is available. As the army has increased its control over minority areas, civilians have few options but to either comply with relocation orders or remain in hiding during army raids.

While in hiding, internally displaced risk being shot on sight by Burmese army patrols which seek out communities suspected of aiding the insurgents. Anti-personnel mines are a major risk in Burma, affecting nine out of 14 states. The concentration of landmines is especially dense along the border with Thailand and Bangladesh. Internally displaced who have to be constantly on the move in order to avoid military patrols are particularly vulnerable, as most minefields are unmarked. Also, the army allegedly lays mines close to areas of civilian activity to prevent relocated villagers from returning to their native villages. There is no systematic collection of information about mine casualties, but there is evidence that Myanmar is among the countries with the highest number of casualties each year. The mine threat has been identified as one of the main impediments to any future return of IDPs and refugees (LM, 2005; HRW, June 2005, p.13).

Internally displaced people also face a range of other protection problems such as lack of personal documentation, insecure land tenure and threats of sexual abuse. Local and international non-governmental organisations have documented widespread and continuing sexual violence against ethnic minority women by the military in Burma. Documentation gathered from Karen, Shan and Arakan states concludes that sexual violence is being systematically used as a weapon against the ethnic minority population (KWO, February 2007; HRW, Annual report 2005; UN CHR, 2 December 2004). While the general humanitarian situation in the country has deteriorated over the past years, the situation is particularly critical for internally displaced in eastern Burma.

The international community is denied access to IDPs


The government of Burma continues to deny the existence of IDPs in the country. After a period of expanded humanitarian space to some areas in eastern Burma, access was restricted again by a set of government guidelines in February 2006 (Mizzima News, 13 February 2006). The tight surveillance imposed by the regime has led the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria to terminate grants and Médecins Sans Frontières – France to cease its activities inside Burma (COE-DMHA, 20 December 2005; MSF, 20 March 2006). Even the ICRC, which has a long-standing presence in Burma, was restricted in carrying out its work, including prison visits during 2006, and has been forced to close down field offices (ICRC, 15 February 2007; Mizzima News, 24 February 2006). Cooperation with the government has been complicated further by the sudden relocation of key ministries to Pyinmana in southern Mandalay division (UN CHR, 27 February 2006, para 7). UNHCR still has only limited access to communities affected by displacement in three provinces where it is carrying out Quick Impact Projects in over 300 villages (UNHCR, 9 March 2007, p.5).

However, the large majority of people needing assistance in Burma are cut off from international relief. Local community-based networks in Burma are active in many ethnic minority-populated areas (both government-controlled and ceasefire zones). Most humanitarian assistance to relocation sites comes from community-based organisations and local NGOs, either through self-help initiatives or low-profile aid programmes (HRW, June 2005, p.60). The internally displaced in conflict areas mitigate their disastrous situation by hiding food in various locations and preparing emergency sites in case of army raids. In some cases, the internally displaced organise armed militia units and cooperate with ethnic rebel armies to gain early warning about troop movements. In ceasefire areas, relocation sites and in areas of mixed administration, the main method of minimising threats is to comply with extortion and follow orders (TBBC, October 2005, pp.55-56).

Expressing concern about the humanitarian and human rights situation in the Karen state, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar has urged the country to grant aid groups immediate access to affected civilians (UNNS, 26 February 2007).

Inconsistent international response


After the Burmese military brutally suppressed the democracy movement in 1988, most multilateral and bilateral assistance to Burma was suspended. Humanitarian assistance has been reduced dramatically as a consequence, while disease, poverty, malnutrition and human rights abuses have increased (RI, June 2006, ii).
There is an increasing recognition that the protracted conflict in Burma is a threat to regional peace and security. The UN Security Council received informal briefings on the situation in Burma after the UN Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs had visited the country in December 2005 and May 2006. Burma was subsequently formally added to the Security Council’s agenda, but a US-sponsored resolution was vetoed by China and Russia in January 2007.

The UN Resident Coordinator in Burma has recently been appointed Humanitarian Coordinator, which signifies a formal step from the UN to engage in humanitarian affairs inside Burma. In addition to the ICRC and UN agencies, about 35 international NGOs are based in the country. Operational assistance by UN organisations and international NGOs inside the country consists mainly of social development projects targeting the poor in government-controlled areas, including Arakan, Chin, Kachin and southern Shan states, and to a lesser degree in south-east Burma (Karen and Mon states and Tenasserim division). Some international NGOs in Burma are able to assist relocated populations via local partner NGOs.

The Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Myanmar, Tan Sri Razali Ismail, stepped down in January 2006 upon expiration of his contract and after having been denied access to the country since March 2004. The term of the UN Special Rapporteur on Myanmar, Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, comes to an end in July 2007, and it is uncertain what will happen to the mandate since the Human Rights Council, to which he reports, is considering abolishing all country mandates. He has not been allowed to visit the country since November 2003 (UNCHR, 27 February 2006).

The Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) has also openly reacted to the lack of political progress in the country. It persuaded the Burmese government to abandon its turn as chair of ASEAN in July 2005 and made an unprecedented visit to Burma to discuss the situation in March 2006 (VoA, 26 March 2006). The EU and the US maintain their economic sanctions against the military regime.

International and regional actors should take every opportunity to raise the need for humanitarian access to conflict-affected populations with the military regime and should develop a common policy vis-à-vis the government in order to improve protection and assistance to Burma’s internally displaced.





================================================================
To leave the list, send your request by email to: wunrn_listserve-request@lists.wunrn.com. Thank you.