Ethnic Cleansing in International Relations through the Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar

Introduction

August 25, 2017 gained international recognition as the beginning of the expulsion, genocide, and ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar, creating the largest ‘stateless’ group in the world, according to the United Nations. It is estimated more than half a million Rohingya Muslims have fled Myanmar since the violence began in August 2017, adding to the already 120,000 displaced Rohingya living in internment camps throughout eastern Asia. Over 1,000 are presumed dead through rape, mass murder, arson, and infanticide classifying this international crisis as an ethnic cleansing through genocide.

This paper will analyse the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya Muslims to understand the motivation and response. To begin, ethnic cleansing and genocide will be defined before a comprehensive history of Myanmar’s complicated past with colonialism and discrimination. Then, the four main International Relations (IR) paradigms: Realism, Constructivism, Liberalism, and International Political Economy (IPE) will be applied to better understand the issue. Realism will analyse the response of the Myanmar government for their perception of the Rohingya Muslims as a threat to the state; Constructivism and Liberalism will identify the specific relationships of hatred and violence against the Rohingya and the international response; and IPE will identify economic issues which have led to reoccurring violence against the Rohingya.

Furthermore, the four paradigms will be identified and analysed throughout media reports on the Rohingya Muslims and how journalists could improve reporting of the issue. The two media sources are reports from Al Jazeera and South China Morning Post from September 2017.

Ethnic Cleansing versus Genocide

The definitions and applications of “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide” are heavily debated within the realm of human rights groups. The phrase “ethnic cleansing” is technically not a legal term and the vastness allows too much room for interpretation to be applied to every context. However the term “genocide” implies an attempt of mass extinction of a particular group, usually reserved to describe Rwanda, Cambodia, and the Holocaust.

According the the UN Commission of Experts, an ethnic cleansing is defined as “...a purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror- inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas.” As the Rohingya Muslims are currently fleeing Myanmar for fear of violence and death, the term “ethnic cleansing” is felicitous.

As ethnic cleansing is defined by policy, genocide focuses on the extermination of particular groups through bodily harm. According to Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, genocide is defined as “committing any of the following acts with intent to destroy, in whole or in part , a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflict on the group conditions of life calculate to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measure intended to prevent births within the group; forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

The mass expulsion of the Rohingya Muslims falls under the constrictions of an ethnic cleansing as the Myanmar government is systematically removing the group by violent means. However many points of genocide are also present, specifically mass murder and creating serious bodily and mental harm. There are also reports of infanticide and rape of Rohingya Muslim women which many experts argue could be seen as an intent to destroy the future of the group. Violence against women and children, unarguably the most vulnerable groups, have been used around the world as a special form of brutality. Referring to the Native Americans of the US, “massacres and forced removals led to loss of life and homelands, but as long as women bore and raised children within [Indian] households and communities, tribal affiliation would remain. Practices that interfered with women’s reproduction and the rearing of children were immensely destructive to Indian peoples as distinctive sovereign entities” (Margaret D. Jacobs, 2016) As long as children were still raised by Native American mothers, the culture could still survive. Through the destruction of children and women, future generations are destroyed.

The argument of whether the systematic expulsion and destruction of the Rohingya Muslims is a form of ethnic cleansing or genocide is extremely relevant. There are connections to both policy and evidence of bodily harm to decrease the birth rate, therefore international courts have made the claim that certain acts of ethnic cleansing may constitute genocide if there is a specific intent. “Genocidal intent refers to the complete or partial destruction of a national ethnic, racial, or religious group as such, whereas the intent accompanying ethnic cleansing aims at the removal of a group from a certain territory and not necessarily its physical or biological destruction” (Maja Munivrana Vajda, 2017: 154). Because there is high evidence of genocidal intent throughout the crisis, ethnic cleansing as form of genocide will be used to describe the current Rohingya Muslim crisis throughout this paper.

Who are the Rohingya Muslims?

Regularly described as “the world’s most persecuted minority,” violence against the Rohingya Muslims can be traced back to 1824 when colonial policies from Great Britain encouraged migrant labor to increase profits in exchange for cheap labor. The British promised the Rohingya their own land and the Muslim population tripled between 1871 and 1911, according to census records. The division between the Rohingya and Burmese nationalists continued to the Second World War, in which the Rohingya were rewarded for siding with the British. Meanwhile, Burmese nationalists sided with Japan, hoping for an end to English imperialism.

Great Britain ruled Myanmar, formerly Burma, until 1948 before they finally gained independence leaving the Rohingya defenceless. Many in Myanmar saw the Rohingya as having benefited from colonial rule, which combined with the Buddhist religious revival, further divided the groups. Continually denied citizenship, the Rohingya’s position worsened and violent incidents increased with the establishment of a one-party military state, which viewed the Rohingya as a threat to nationalist identity and imposition of an Islamist state. Then in 1982, Myanmar’s government passed a law identifying 135 ethnicities entitled to citizenship. As the Rohingya are still considered Bengali, they were not included. The Citizenship Act of Myanmar required that a person’s ancestors belong to a national race or group present in Myanmar prior to British rule in 1823, in order to gain citizenship. Many of the Rohingya were still considered illegal immigrants allowed to live in Myanmar by Great Britain which made them the largest ‘stateless’ community in the world, according to the UN.

In the years that followed, the Rohingya have steadily lost their rights, been persecuted, and have clashed with citizens. The lack of citizenship has left the Rohingya community in catastrophe due to the deprivation of basically human rights such as: health care, education, property rights, marry, travel, and employment. Families are allowed no more than two children and the illiteracy rate is over 80 percent, according to the UN.

The spark to the fastest developing humanitarian crisis, according to UN Security General António Guterres, began Aug. 25 when the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army attacked police posts, killing 12 officers, according to the government. The Arakan Salvation Army (ARSA) was created to defend and protect Rohingya Muslims who have faced regular discrimination by civilians and the local police. The Myanmar authorities deny any wrongdoing and claim the ARSA are Muslim "terrorists" who want to impose Islamic rule.

Nations around the world have condemned the violence against the Rohingya Muslims and have taken action against trade agreements and military support. The United Nations Human Rights Chief Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein said the situation seems a “textbook example of an ethnic cleansing” to the Human Rights Council in Geneva. However, it was also noted the situation cannot be fully assessed as human rights investigators have not been granted access to the areas. Al-Hussein also cited reports of Myanmar authorities planting landmines along the border, killing and injuring several refugees as they fled, including 2 children. There are also reports of authorities requiring proof of citizenship to enter the country, an impossibility as the Rohingya have been denied citizenship rights for decades.

Ethnic Cleansing and International Relations Realism

In the paradigm of realism, the states are the main actors. Their primary goals are sovereignty, security, and obtainment of power in order to secure a state’s survival, of which the military and high politics are utilised, which makes realism especially dangerous. Furthermore, realism is the idea that ...“states have no permanent friends or permanent enemies, merely permanent interests” and are merely a group of actors acting in anarchy (Nye & Welch, 2011: 56). This means inter-state relationships are constantly changing based on internal needs and threats. The only possibility of coexisting in peace is through a balance of power between states.

Within the context of the ethnic cleansing in Myanmar, a realist approach has dominated the country; the country always saw the Rohingya Muslims as a threat to their culture and religion. However, the Rohingya are not another state and lack basic human rights and citizenship, therefore posing no real threat to the state. After the ARSA attack, the government had a reason to carry out a swift and violent expulsion of the Rohingya from the area, fulfilling the desire to instil fear and dominate the Rohingya.

The fear of an Islamic state imposition is an abstraction created by the Myanmar government. Rohingya Muslims make up less than 4% of the mainly Buddhist population, according to the UN. Because of this, the ethnic cleansing is highly unjustified and immoral on the individual level. However, the Myanmar government sees this ethnic group as a threat and therefore places the protection of the state above moralist decisions, as demonstrated by the scale of violence toward the Muslims. More than half a million have fled to Bangladesh and are currently awaiting their fate in refugee camps along the border. To top this, the Myanmar army has placed landmines along the border to prevent the refugees from returning home, and demanding proof of citizenship at all border checks, of which the Rohingya Muslims have been denied since 1982.

Furthermore, the Myanmar government is denying violence and barring human rights groups from entering the country for surveillance. The aid groups who manage to get through are only allowed to interact with pre-approved refugees and citizens. This could be seen as another realist approach by protecting the image of Myanmar as an emerging democracy and shielding itself from blame and ridicule.
Constructivism

Similar to realism, constructivism also agrees with the perception the international system is merely a group of anarchists acting of their own accord. However, constructivists further explain
the perception of of anarchy and danger will change country to country depending on identities and interests, as world affairs are a social construct. Constructivists believe that “concepts such as ‘state’ and ‘sovereignty’ that shape our understandings of world politics and that animate our theories are, in fact, socially constructed; they are not given. Nor are they permanent. Even our understanding of ‘security’ evolves” (Nye & Welch, 2011: 8-9). Constructivists believe the perceived threat specific states feel is based on a myriad of reasons ranging from historical context to cultural norms that affect every state’s relationships. The perfect example is the nuclear crisis between the US and North Korea: the US would not feel threatened if an allied country had nuclear weapons, but since it is a known and reckless enemy, the threat feels more imminent. This is due to the US’s, and the world’s, perception of North Korea based off their reactions and relationships.

Constructivists would examine the cultural norms, identity, and historical context when explaining the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya. “For constructivists, structures include not just the number or configuration of units, but the ties that bind them and the institutions and practices that make them who they are,” as constructivists believe identity is the most important exemplifier (Nye & Welch, 2011: 63). As Myanmar is known for a complicated history and regular persecution of the Rohingya, constructivists would rationalise the ethnic cleansing due to the perceived threat of an Islamist state, arbitrarily different than the primarily Buddhist state. Cultural differences and norms have long created animosity between the two groups before finally exploding into the most recent of a long history of violence.

Constructivists analyse the best way to alleviate this discrimination as a social construct to break the cyclical cycle of violence to create a solution. “Constructivists draw on different disciplines to examine the processes by which leaders, peoples and cultures alter their preferences, shape their identities, and learn new behaviours,” therefore a constructivist would claim the deeply rooted discrimination and hatred could be unlearned by the people of Myanmar (Nye & Welch, 2011: 8).
Liberalism

Similar to constructivism, liberalism also focuses on understanding underlying issues and recognises there are multiple factors that influence the state’s actions. Liberals also agree with realism in the identification and existence of anarchy, however liberals believe stability and universal peace are possible. Furthermore, liberalism criticises realism by focusing on an open theory through international organisation and cooperation. Liberals believe “institutions reduce the effect of the anarchy that the realists assume...a state of peace means a propensity toward peace, and that people can develop peaceful expectations when anarchy is stabilised by international institutions” (Nye & Welch, 2011: 60). Liberals believe anarchy can be depleted through institutional guidance, freeing citizens to focus on welfare and a standard of living. The main actors are the states, non-states diplomats, NGO’s, and any other organisations that advocate international partnership and cooperation. There are three forms to liberalism: political, societal, and economic.

As liberals focus on structural support through politics, the lack of citizenship and basic human rights enforced by the government would be used as an explanation for the ethnic cleansing. The Rohingya Muslims have lacked governmental and institutional structural support since Myanmar’s independent inception, creating a lack in education, economic gain, health issues, etc. “Institutions reduce the effect of the anarchy that the realists assume...a state of peace means a propensity toward peace, and that people can develop peaceful expectations when anarchy is stabilised by international institutions” (Nye & Welch, 2011: 60). Liberals believe institutions provide the necessary support of basic rights, allowing people to focus on well-being and prosperity. Liberals would have blamed the lack of structural and governmental support as the reason for the current crisis and expulsion.

Liberals would also advocate for international support to mitigate anarchy when looking at the ethnic cleansing. Most aid groups have not been allowed to intervene, along with the UN. The extent of the damage has not been surveyed because the Myanmar government claims there is no wrong-doing. Aung San Suu Kyi, the equivalent to the Prime Minister of Myanmar, has endured international criticism for her denial and apparent cavalier attitude toward the treatment of the Rohingya. Most recently, her Freedom of the City of Oxford award has been stripped and advocates are clamouring for the revocation of her Nobel Peace Prize.

In the form of societal liberalism, liberals “argue that person-to-person contacts reduce conflict by promoting understanding...Such contacts make others seem less foreign and less hateful. That, in turn, leads to a lower likelihood of conflict” (Nye & Welch, 2011: 59). Liberals believe the more contact between groups will lead to a better understanding and less issues. As the Rohingya Muslims have long been separated from the rest of the country, both culturally and politically, there is a fundamental lack of understanding between the two groups. Both groups see one another as a threat and the tension is consistently on the rise.

To resolve the issue, a liberalist would say access to citizenship and international cooperation is the best resolution to end anarchy within the state, therefore rendering the ethnic cleansing unnecessary.
IPE

International Political Economics (IPE) is not very prevalent in the current crisis as the ethnic cleansing is mostly rooted in a deep level of hatred. As the main actors for IPE perspective are states and individuals, the focus is on the array of markets and economic classes, and the effect on the state measured by wealth and international trade. The main goals are state power through welfare, class interests, and the wellbeing of individuals and society (Jackson & Sørensen, 2010: 7).

Even though IPE is not directly prevalent, an economist may identify many of the present issues as a direct result of British Imperialist rule as the first evidence of strife. The British allowed Rohingya Muslims to enter Myanmar as a work force and ranked them higher than their Buddhist counterparts, allowing them to gain more wealth and power, creating a “dual economy.” A dual economy is the phenomenon “in which a small, wealthy, educated, urban, economic elite interacted with and profited handsomely from globalisation, while the vast majority of impoverished, largely rural, farmers, labourers, and miners, did not” (Nye & Welch, 2011: 7). Although the Rohingya Muslims did not become exceptionally wealthy during this period, they enjoyed many benefits and positions of power as a direct result of British partnership. British imperialists imported cheap labor, but then used the Rohingya Muslims to create a power imbalance within the society. This created issues between the Buddhists and Muslims, allowing the British to divert focus away from the main issue of imperialism and maintain control.

There is also evidence of IPE through the reactions of other countries to the ethnic cleansing. For example, the Maldives have ceased all trading with Myanmar and several other countries are threatening to follow suit, an example of the Dependency Theory. The Dependency Theory claims “the wealthy countries in the ‘centre’ of the global marketplace would control and hold back poorer countries on the ‘periphery’” (Nye & Welch, 2011: 7). As Myanmar was a British colony, they have long depended on other countries for economic stimulation. Dropping trade agreements with any country could result in economic devastation for the country as a whole. The use of economic pressure to influence governmental decisions is a form of IPE and could also be used as a resolution.

Ethnic Cleansing, IR, & Media

An ethnic cleansing is exceptionally difficult and delicate to cover for various reasons, specifically not to sensationalise or deemphasise the crisis. The IR paradigms are very prevalent throughout news reports as they are very intertwined in the ethnic cleansing, but most focus on constructivism and liberalism. As the discrimination of the Rohingya Muslims has been happening for the past few decades, this paper will focus on the most recent ethnic cleansing.

Al Jazeera and the South China Morning Post will be analysed using the International Relations paradigms to discern the optimal method of coverage. Both articles are from September 2017 and range between realism, constructivism and liberalism approaches.
Al Jazeera “Myanmar: Who are the Rohingya?”

The most prominent paradigms presented throughout Al Jazeera’s report are constructivism, liberalism and realism. To begin, the headline “Who are the Rohingya?” and the sub-headline “Why are the more than one million Rohingya in Myanmar considered the 'world's most persecuted minority’?" does not describe the ethnic cleansing, but instead tells the reader from the start this report will be a comprehensive breakdown of the ethnic group. Al Jazeera understands the complicated history of Myanmar is extremely important to grasp the crisis. Furthermore, there are subheads spaced throughout the article which answer all of the questions: who, what, where, why, when, and how. Constructivism is heavily used because “constructivists help us understand how preferences are formed and how knowledge is generated prior to the exercise of instrumental rationality” (Nye & Welch, 2011: 8). Al Jazeera recognises the complications within the ethnic cleansing and give a lengthy history to help readers understand how and why this crisis began. This background information coupled with the powerful photos spaced throughout bring the crisis to a human level rather than a series of numbers and facts.

Liberalism is also very prevalent throughout the report as international organisations responses are regularly cited. These organisations range from the UN to human rights groups such as the National Commission for Human Rights, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch. The article does a good job of explaining their reactions and attempts to cooperate with Aung San Suu Kyi and the rest of the Myanmar government, a prime example of a liberalist approach as they attempt to limit the effect of anarchy.

There are also small instances of realism seen when quoting Aung San Suu Kyi, who refused to comment on the expulsion, and the Myanmar government. Al Jazeera goes on to break down the many issues between international organisations and the Myanmar government over the past few years and is sure to include the realist ideal by the government of having “the right to defend the country by lawful means” against “increasing terrorist activities,” according to officials. Furthermore, Al Jazeera is very specific to include the fact that journalists have been banned by the Myanmar government, along with several human rights groups, and are only allowed to speak to Rohingya Muslims who have been “pre-approved” by government. This isolation tactic is a realist form of the government attempting to protect the state. By including this subhead within the article, Al Jazeera highlights international organisation’s liberalist approach contrasted against the realist approach of the Myanmar government.
South China Morning Post “‘One Bullet, Two Bodies’: A Rohingya’s Escape, From Myanmar To Malaysian Madrassa”

The South China Morning Post’s (SCMP) article focuses mainly on one paradigm: constructivism. The entire article is told from the perspective of Sadek Ali Hassan, a Rohingya Muslim refugee currently living in Malaysia. Sadek fled Myanmar over 25 years ago, but still remembers the violence and unstableness he experienced in his youth. The entire article’s first person perspective displays the constructivist approach of understanding the differing processes people use to alter their preferences and shape identities. Constructivists believe social structures are based on identities and interests, of which are not given, but are a direct production of social interactions which will slowly make for a meaningful and orderly change.

The SCMP also utilises liberalism through Sadek’s quotes of providing a future for the refugees through the establishment of his school. “I want them to have a future. I have a direct interest in all of this because I have four small children of my own. I mustn’t give up though there are times when it’s all too much. We have children who could become engineers, doctors or judges but they need a home,” (SCMP, 2017). Sadek believes institutions and education are necessary to provide support to refugees, a very liberal approach. He recognises, as displaced people, refugees fall through the cracks and only through education can the Rohingya Muslims have any future. Sadek also voices his desire for his people to live well, echoing the main goals of liberalism: welfare, justice, and security.

Improvements to the Media Avoiding Compassion Fatigue

Compassion fatigue is the phenomenon used to describe a person’s limit to process traumatic events, forcing people to ignore or move on. In the media, compassion fatigue “abets American self-interest; it reinforces simplistic, formulaic coverage; it ratchets up the criteria for stories that get coverage; it tempts journalists to sensationalise; and it encourages the media to move on” (Moeller 1992: 2). As compassion fatigue encourages sensationalisation and moving from story to story, journalists must be aware of the effect this could have on the crisis. As crises, especially an ethnic cleansing, are very complicated and generally will last more than a few days, journalists and editors must be aware of the time that goes into reporting well. “Our capacity to care and sense of obligation to others expresses... much deeper and historically developmental processes in which former ‘others’ becomes progressively recognised and incorporated into the category of ‘people like us’” (Cottle: 133). Therefore, as journalists report and humanise events, readers are able to empathise with the cause, minimising the emotional distance.
Emergency News

In her book “The Spectator of Suffering,” Lilie Chouliaraki explores how the news media can elicit a sense of obligation, which has led to the creation of the “regimes of pity” based on three different types of news reporting: adventure, ecstatic, and emergency news. Adventure news focuses on one single event, usually a tragedy, and sensationalises it to the point of making it a phenomenon. Ecstatic news, however, takes this a step further and focuses on the identity of the sufferer. Ecstatic news is usually meant to create a more human, or emotional, side to the story by putting a face to the incident. The third, and most effective, is emergency news. Emergency news “produces pity and does so by providing visually and verbally complicated narratives with affective power” (Moeller, 136). Through emergency news, news reports provide complex narratives which displays suffering and promotes a frame of action to the readers. Emergency news is considered the most useful as it looks at all benefactors, persecutors, and suffered. Emergency news “provides differing opportunities for spectators to discern, and therefore possibly to act, on the basis of a sense of obligation to those who are depicted as suffering” (Moeller: 136). Rather than sensationalising or isolating a crisis, emergency news aims to understand and depict the tragedy accurately while calling to a form of action from readers. Journalists need to be aware of which regime of pity they are creating through their news reports and recognise the effects.

Sensationalisation

Similar to compassion fatigue and emergency news, journalists have a duty to not sensationalise the news. This can be avoided by focusing on all of the main questions; not just ‘who,’ ‘what,’ and ‘where.’ The ‘why’ and the ‘how’ are easily the most important questions to answer when analysing the cause of the Rohingya Muslim crisis as this is not an isolated incident. By ignoring these questions, journalists demean a huge part of the ethnic cleansing that has stemmed from decades of violence and discrimination.

24/7 News Cycle

Journalists and editors need to be aware of the pressure to pump out superficial and poorly researched stories. The evolution of technology has created a 24/7 news cycle online, forcing media sources to race for the first story. Media outlets publish poorly researched and superficial stories in an attempt to be the first. The pressure to publish poorly researched stories also affects how journalists cover international news. As journalists are “no longer residents of all the countries they cover, journalists become parachutists jetting madly to regional crises, jumping into situations cold.” (Moeller: 26). Journalists can travel easily and often rely on translators, international groups, and misinformed sources to crank out stories. Editors and journalists need to be more patient and aware of the effect poorly researched stories have on the reader and on the world.

Choosing the Right Sources

In specifically dangerous areas, journalists often lack of access to areas and resources. In the case of Myanmar, journalists and aid groups have been denied entry by the Myanmar government. In these cases, journalists do not choose the best sources for stories and instead focus on facts and numbers. For example, the Pol Pot regime as part of the Khmer Rouge denied journalists entry to Cambodia. “The story could still have been reported from the outside using the testimony of those who had escaped the killing fields, but journalists were skeptical of the extraordinary reports from those few refugees who had fled across the border to Thailand. Journalists wanted either to see the conditions with their own eyes or to source the story was a ‘dispassionate’”(Moeller: 28). Rather than believing escapees, journalists chose to not fully report on the genocide, of which could have aided the people of Cambodia.

The SCMP article is a great example of searching for alternative sources. Journalists were not able to enter Myanmar, so the journalists interviewed someone who had long been affected by the violence. Similarly, there are camps of refugees all along the border between Myanmar and Bangladesh full of Rohingya Muslim refugees and these should be utilised by journalists to fully tell the story rather than focusing on the governments and aid groups.

The IR Paradigms

The IR paradigms can be especially useful when reporting an ethnic cleansing as there are so many factors that motivate the act. If journalists can understand and apply any relevant factors, they may be able to understand the issues on a more theoretical level. However, journalists must be aware that presenting news reports through the paradigms could also confuse some readers. Responsible and ethical journalism is always the most important form, however the IR paradigms could play a relevant role providing theoretical guides to journalists.

Conclusions

The ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar has been understood and analysed through the four International Relations paradigms. Realism was used to examine the government’s reasoning for violence as a way to protect the state from, what they perceived, as a threat. Constructivism dissected the historical implications of discrimination and violence against the Rohingya for decades that have led to the cleansing. Liberalism was used to highlight the lack of basic human rights that prompted a violent response from the ARSA, creating a domino affect of violence. IPE was used to examine the economic implications and the forthcoming results based off these attacks. These paradigms could also be utilised by the media, along with other tactics, to improve writing and the output of information. Awareness of compassion fatigue, the detrimental effects of the 24/7 news cycle, and choosing the right sources are all extremely necessary when reporting the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya Muslims.

The combination of the four paradigms create a comprehensive lens to the atrocities against the Rohingya Muslims. Identifying and understanding the underlying problems could create a resolution for the future and prevent further damage to the Rohingya Muslims.

Bibliography

Al Jazeera, “Who are the Rohingya Muslims?” http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/08/rohingya- muslims-170831065142812.html

The Atlantic, “The Misunderstood Roots of Burma's Rohingya Crisis”https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/09/rohingyas-burma/540513/

BBC, “Who will help Myanmar's Rohingya?” http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38168917 [last accessed 04/10/17]

BBC, “Why Is There Communal Violence in Myanmar?” http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-18395788

Cottle, Simon. Global Crisis Reporting, Journalism in the Global Age. McGraw Hill, 2009. pg. 127-146.

Chouliaraki, Lilie. The Spectator of Suffering. Pine Forge press, June 2006.

The Guardian, “Myanmar tells UN: 'There is no ethnic cleansing and no genocide' of Rohingya”https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/29/myanmar-un-ethnic-cleansing-genocide-rohingya

Jacobs, Margaret D. Genocide or Ethnic Cleansing? Are These Our Only Choices?, Western Historical Quarterly, Volume 47, Issue 4, 1 November 2016, Pages 444–448

https://academic-oup-com.ez.statsbiblioteket.dk:12048/whq/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/whq/

whw104

The Journal of Criminal Law. Vol 78, Issue 5, pp. 423 - 441

First published date: October-01-2014

Moeller, Susan D. Compassion Fatigue: How The Media Sell Disease, Famine, War and Death. Routledge, New York 1999, pg. 1-28.

Nye, Joseph S. & Welch, David A. 2011. Understanding global conflict and cooperation. Boston: Longman.

Phil's stock world: Who's really behind the Rohingya Muslim Crisis? (2017). . Chatham: Newstex. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ez.statsbiblioteket.dk:12048/docview/ 1936269609?accountid=14468

Robert Jackson & George Sorenson. 2012. Introduction to International Relations. Oxford University Press.

The United Nations “UN human rights chief points to ‘textbook example of ethnic cleansing’ in Myanmar” http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=57490#.Wc_D70x7Eb0

Studienr: 201704406 !14

The United Nations, Ethnic Cleansing & Genocide Prevention http://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/ethnic-cleansing.html

UN General Assembly, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 9 December 1948, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 78, p. 277, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3ac0.html [accessed 2 October 2017] https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/unts/volume%2078/volume-78-i-1021-english.pdf

South China Morning Post, “One Bullet, Two Bodies” http://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/2112858/one-bullet-two-bodies-rohingyas- escape-myanmar-malaysian-madrassa

Stephen L. Egbert, Nathaniel R. Pickett, Nicole Reiz, William Price, Austen Thelen, Vincent Artman. (2016) Territorial Cleansing: A Geopolitical Approach to Understanding Mass Violence. Territory, Politics, Governance 4:3, pages 297-318.

Vajda, Maja Munivrana. "Ethnic Cleansing as Genocide - Assessing the Croatian Genocide Case Before the ICJ". International criminal law review (1567-536X), 15 (1), p. 147.