Friday, December 26, 2025
Home Blog Page 3791

Iran’s Hassanzadeh to Be Named AFC Futsal Player of Year

Hassanzadeh

While the official winners of AFC awards are expected to be announced on Wednesday, Hassanzadeh is reported to be the chosen as the AFC Futsal Player of the Year.

He is going to attend the awards ceremony, which is due to be held in Bangkok on November 29, according to Iranian media reports.

Hassanzadeh, who first won the AFC Futsal Player of the Year accolade in 2014 and then in 2016, has been instrumental in Iran’s achievements in recent years.

Currently playing for Giti Pasand in the Iranian Futsal Super League, Hassanzadeh has also won the AFC Futsal Club Championship on two occasions – in 2010 with Foolad Mahan and five years later whilst representing Tasisat Daryaei.

Iran’s Beauties in Photos: Autumn in Mashhad

The city is named after and known for housing the tomb of Imam Reza, the eighth Shiite Imam. Every year, millions of pilgrims visit the Imam Reza shrine and pay their tributes to Imam Reza.

Mashhad features a steppe climate with hot summers and cool winters. The city only sees about 250 millimetres of precipitation per year, some of which occasionally falls in the form of snow.

Mashhad also has wetter and drier periods with the bulk of the annual precipitation falling between the months of December and May. Summers are typically hot and dry, with high temperatures sometimes exceeding 35 °C. Winters are typically cool to cold and somewhat damper, with overnight lows routinely dropping below freezing. Mashhad enjoys on average just above 2,900 hours of sunshine per year.

What follows are Tasnim’s photos of Mashhad’s beauty in autumn:

Iran Says Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal Threatens Mideast Security

Reza Najafi

Addressing a meeting of the IAEA’s 35-member Board of Governors in Vienna on Friday, Najafi denounced the West’s double standard approaches on Israel’s move to develop its nuclear program in violation of all international regulations.

The Iranian envoy also highlighted the repeated demands of the international community and the IAEA resolutions that the Israeli regime immediately join the NPT and Israel’s nuclear installations be subjected to the full monitoring of IAEA safeguards..

“The Zionist regime [of Israel] has unfortunately overlooked legitimate demands of the international community over the past years and continued to advance its military nuclear program in blatant violation of all international regulations and with the blind support of certain countries,” he said.

He added Israeli military nuclear activities are the main cause of concern among regional nations and the international community and urged the UN nuclear agency to closely and seriously attend to the issue.

Najafi also urged a complete ban on any type of nuclear cooperation with Israel.

Israel is estimated to have 200 to 400 nuclear warheads in its arsenal. The regime, however, refuses to either accept or deny having the weapons.

It has also evaded signing the NPT amid staunch endeavor by the United States and other Western states on international levels in favor of its non-commitment to the accord.

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25

Several papers today covered the remarks made by the Leader of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei in a meeting with a group of Muslims clerics from around the world. During the meeting, the Leader particularly highlighted the need for unity among Muslim countries and the removal of the ‘cancerous tumour’ of Israel.

A deadly terrorist attack on a mosque in Egypt’s Arish also received great coverage. Iran has strongly condemned the attack, which has so far killed at least 235 people.

Also a top story was Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s anti-Iran comments, which were downplayed by the Iranian foreign ministry spokesman.

The above issues, as well as many more, are highlighted in the following headlines and top stories:

 

19 Dey:

1- Bloody Prayers in Egypt: Over 300 Killed, Wounded in Mosque Attack

2- Iran Leader: Unity of Muslim Society Very Necessary

3- Urban Development Minister: We’ll Stand by Quake-Hit People until Last Reconstruction

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Abrar:

1- Rouhani: Iran Sees Afghanistan’s Peace, Stability Beneficial for Region

2- Larijani: Terrorists Migrating to Libya and Afghanistan

3- Bin Salman: With Trump’s Support, We Seek to Create Anti-Iran Coalition

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Aftab-e Yazd:

1- Iran Leader: We’ll Help Wherever Our Presence Needed for Countering Arrogance

2- IRGC Chief-Commander: We’re Providing Yemen with Advisory Help

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Etemad:

1- Waiting for the Government: Latest Efforts to Legalize Ban on Violence against Women

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Ettela’at:

1- Iran Top General: We’re Ready to Prevent Seditions Similar to ISIS

2- Rouhani to Afghan President: We Should Be Vigilant against Divisive Enemy Plots

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Iran:

1- Reconstruction of Quake-Hit Areas Started Today

  • People to Live in Their Permanent Houses in Less than One Year: Minister

2- Iran First VP: No Country Benefits from Global Threats

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25

 

Javan:

1- IRGC Chief-Commander: For Now, We Exercise Self-Restraint towards Saudi Arabia

2- Expensive Bread for Domestic Market, Cheap Gas for Other Countries

  • Two Reports on Poor Supply of Bread, Waste of $135bn by Gas Dealers

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Jomhouri Eslami:

1- Iran Leader: Love for Prophet Muhammad’s Descendants Proper Ground for Muslim Unity

2- Iran Urges Saudi Crown Prince to Think about Regional Dictators’ Fate

3- Robert Fisk: Time Has Chanted, US No Longer Has Final Say in Mideast

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Kayhan:

1- American Torturers Hanging Saudi Princes Opposed to Bin Salman Upside Down

2- Formation of ISIS Increased Preparedness of Resistance Front: IRGC Chief

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Quds:

1- Over 500 Shiite, Sunni Clerics from 94 Countries Gather in Imam Reza Shrine

2- AFC Says Saudi Football Teams Should Come to Iran for ACL Matches

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Resalat:

1- Iran Leader: US, Zionism Won’t Stop Hostility towards Islam

2- IRGC Chief-Commander: We’ll Show Restraint towards Saudi Arabia’s Hostile Approach

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Saheb Qalam:

1- First VP: Cooperation with Latin America Crucial in Iran Foreign Policy

2- Velayati: We’re Proud of Iran’s Regional Influence

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25


 

Shahrvand:

1- Iran Earthquake Causes $1.4 Billion in Damage, 11 Times More than Province’s Annual Budget

A Look at Iranian Newspaper Front Pages on November 25

 

“Macron Should Recall France’s Arming of Saddam against Iran”

French-President

Reza Nasri, an Iranian expert in international law, has, in an elaborate interview with the Persian-language reformist newspaper Jame’eh Farda, has weighed in on the policies of the new French government and the reasons behind President Macron’s position on Iran.

Nasri, who resides in Geneva, has also expounded on the structure of the American institutions making decisions on the country’s international relations and the trend of regulating the country’s foreign policy.

Nasri says the US State Department, traditionally and historically, mostly relies on scientific data and consultation with think-tanks and universities in order to adopt its foreign policy. However, he says, the White House is mostly dependent on experience rather than drawing on scientific consultations, and is engaged with powerful lobbies. He says the non-scientific approach adopted by the White House is more noticeable at this juncture than ever.

The highlights of Nasri’s views on Iran-France relations, translated by the IFP News, follow:

 

The Macron administration tries to consolidate France’s position in the European Union and turn the country into the pivot of the bloc’s common foreign policy.

A viewpoint prevailing in part of France’s ruling elite is that with the Brexit coming into force and Britain leaving the European Union, France will practically be the only country in the bloc to enjoy the right of veto at the UN Security Council and possess the nuclear deterrence capability. Moreover, France believes its special relationship with the Arab world and the country’s colonial background makes it all the more necessary for Paris to play a more independent and more active role in settling regional conflicts.

France seeks to talk to Iran with a different tone, i.e. from a position of power, so that it might be able to play a role as a replacement for Mogherini to act as an intermediary between Iran and Saudi Arabia or Iran and the US.

It seems that so far, France’s harsh tone vis-à-vis Iran and its missile program, especially in comparison with the more logical and moderate position adopted by Mogherini and EU officials, has backfired.

The Rouhani administration is highly capable of establishing interaction and rapport with world powers. It can prevent the formation of consensus both inside and outside countries through different ways, namely through public diplomacy and enhancement of trade and economic ties with private players. What is more, a legal/political framework called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) exists between Iran, European countries, China and Russia, a framework which has many advocates and no country can easily violate it by imposing different sanctions.

Another point is that I do not think that in the ballistic missile issue, Iran will face problems which have the same weight as the ones in the nuclear dossier.

Mogherini has stressed that there are no anti-Iran sanctions on the agenda. Moreover, Iran’s situation is geopolitically and strategically very much different from its previous position, so much so that Iran will be able to safeguard its interests in the balance of power.

Also, I agree with Dr. Velayati’s position due to several reasons. Furthermore, the president has the same position as well.

From a legal perspective, Iran’s missile program is not in contravention of any of the country’s commitments and international regulations. Iran’s ballistic missiles are conventional weapons which are not banned under any resolutions and agreements, and Iran is entitled to possess them. By the United Nations’ own admission, Iran’s missile activities are not in violation of Resolution 2231. So, Macron has no justification for opposing Iran’s missile program.

From a strategic and security point of view, Iran legitimately and logically has the right to possess missiles. Let’s not forget that Saudi Arabia and certain Persian Gulf countries have, over the past three years, purchased hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons and, hence, have left Iran’s security and regional balance on shaky ground. From a security perspective, Velayati’s position is logical while Macron has no strong argument up his sleeve.

Politically speaking, it will not be in Iran’s interest to accept restrictions in the field of missile activities. In fact, if Iran accepts limitations on its ballistic missile program without any legal and humanitarian justification, there will be no guarantee that this dangerous precedent will not spread into the domain of Iran’s other conventional arms. There will also be no guarantee that the restrictions will not be incorporated into other areas such as flights, shipping, etc. Therefore, the position of the Iranian government and of Velayati is right.

From a historical perspective, Iran’s possession of ballistic missile is justified and legitimate as well. In other words, the French government, as one of the key suppliers of weapons to former Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein during the Iraqi imposed war on Iran in the 1980s, should know better than any other government why Iran is sensitive about its ballistic missile program and deterrence capability.

In fact, Macron, who has called for transparency on Iran’s missile industry, should not forget that it was French Mirage, F-1 and Super Etandard planes as well as Alouette and Super Frelon helicopters plus air-to-ground missiles and the chemicals produced by the Protec SA company that somehow encouraged Iran to develop a deterrence capability and a missile program. So, even from a historical point of view, Macron is not in a position to ask questions.

And finally, the resolution issued by Arab states has no legal value. In fact, a UN panel has rejected Saudi Arabia’s claim against Iran and has reported that the Saudi kingdom has presented no evidence, whatsoever, that suggests Iran provided Houthis with the missile that they recently fired at Riyadh.

Iran FM Blasts “Cowardly” Mosque Attack in Egypt

 In an Arabic post on his Twitter account on Friday, Zarif condemned the deadly terror incident in Egypt’s Arish, which killed and wounded hundreds of people.

“Once again a cowardly act of terrorism dealt a blow to the dear Egyptian nation and once again proved that terrorism does not differentiate between divine and human values [and other things], as it does not differentiate between places, even if they are mosques and place of worship.”

“I strongly condemn this terrorist act and ask God to bestow his blessing and mercy upon the martyrs of the incident and to bring rapid recovery to the wounded,” he added.

At least 235 people were killed when gunmen opened fire and bombed a mosque in Egypt’s volatile Sinai Peninsula on Friday. Government officials said 109 more had been injured in the attack — among the deadliest in Egypt’s history.

Images from inside the building showed dozens of bodies wrapped in blood-soaked cloth lined up on the carpeted floor.

Police sources told The Associated Press that men in four off-road vehicles opened fire on worshippers in the al-Rawdah mosque in the town of Al Rawdah.

Iran Praises Kabul’s Efforts to Create Unity in Afghanistan

In a telephone conversation with his Afghan counterpart Ashraf Ghani on Thursday evening, President Rouhani expressed sorrow over recent terrorist attacks in Afghanistan and said the Kabul government has adopted a vigilant stance against terrorism in line with efforts to preserve unity and foil plots to sow discord in the region.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran wants sustainable peace, stability, and security in Afghanistan and considers them in line with (efforts to) develop its own security and in favor of regional peace and stability,” he noted.

The Afghan president, for his part, expressed condolences over the deadly earthquake in Iran’s western province of Kermanshah, saying that the two nations have always sided with each other.

Ghani further emphasized that one of the principled policies adopted by his government is to strengthen brotherly ties and unity among Shiites and Sunnis, adding that Afghanistan will never allow enemies to sow division in the country.

Back in May, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif paid an official visit to Afghanistan and held talks with senior officials of the country on a range of issues, including ways to boost the relations between the two countries.

President Ghani had traveled to Iran in May 2016 to sign a trilateral agreement between Iran, Afghanistan, and India on the establishment of an international transit corridor via the Iranian port city of Chabahar.

While in Tehran, Ghani met with Rouhani, during which he voiced Kabul’s willingness to cement closer regional cooperation with Tehran.

Iran Urges Bin Salman to Think about Fate of Regional Dictators

In a Friday statement, Qassemi said given the past immature, absurd and unconsidered statements and behaviours of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the world community gives no credit any more to his remarks.

“The mistakes made by the adventurist Saudi crown prince, including his latest scandalous interference in the internal affairs of Lebanon which used to be the traditional ally of Saudi Arabia, have put the kingdom in deep trouble,” he noted.

Now that Bin Salman has begun to follow in the footsteps of the notorious dictators of the region, the Islamic Republic of Iran seriously advises him to think more about their doomed fates over the recent years, he added.

In an interview with the American daily The New York Times on Thursday, the Saudi crown prince said Saudi Arabia prefers a confrontational approach to “appeasement” in dealing with Iran.

Bin Salman also made an analogy between Iran’s growing regional influence and Germany’s hegemonic policies in the Hitler era and said, “We learned from Europe that appeasement does not work.”

Iran Condemns Egypt Terrorist Attack

In a statement on Friday, Qassemi blasted the brutal attack and expressed sympathy with the Egyptian nation and the bereaved families of the victims.

“Undoubtedly, the Takfiri terrorism that is suffering the heaviest defeats these days in the region does not refrain from making any desperate effort and ruthless move to assert its existence once again,” he noted.

“This sharply increases the responsibility of regional governments to gain a real and accurate understanding of terrorism and to seriously and collectively counter it,” Qassemi went on to say.

He also called on all nations and governments to be as vigilant as possible at this particular juncture in the face of new plots by the bloodthirsty losers.

At least 200 people were killed and another 125 injured in an attack on a mosque in Egypt’s North Sinai region on Friday, Egyptian state media reported, making it one of the deadliest attacks ever carried out against civilians in the province.

After at least two explosions, gunmen who were waiting outside the mosque opened fire at worshipers as they fled Friday prayers, state-owned Ahram Online said.

The attack targeted Al Rawdah mosque in Bir Al-Abed, in the west of Arish province, MENA said.

The blasts from improvised explosive devices caused considerable damage to the mosque, Ahram Online said.

“Myanmar Calls Rohingyas Illegal Immigrants to Deny Their Rights”

Myanmar’s Crackdown on Rohingya Turning into Ethnic Cleansing

In a recent exclusive interview with the Persian-language Etemad daily newspaper, Momen has weighed in on Bangladesh’s efforts to help hundreds of thousands of Rohingya Muslims who have been forcibly displaced by the Myanmar government from their historical homeland, Rakhine state.

During the interview, the Bangladeshi diplomat regretted that the international community’s response to the ‘ethnic cleansing’ in Myanmar has been far less than expectation given the enormity and scale of the crisis.

Here is the full text of Momen’s interview with Etemad’s Sara Massoumi:

“Myanmar Calls Rohingyas Illegal Immigrants to Deny Their Rights”Since when was Bangladesh dragged into the Rohingya crisis? 

The August 2017 episode is not the first instance of Rohingya Muslim minorities fleeing to Bangladesh being subjected to atrocities and human rights abuse by the Myanmar authorities. The systematic and exclusionary policy and denial of rights against them began in a big way since General Ne Win’s taking over of power in 1962. Rohingyas were economically and politically marginalized. They were terrorized and forced out of their centuries of settled life in 1978, 1991-92, and 2012, successively with increasing impunity. Each time, Bangladesh has been bearing the main brunt with the exodus of Rakhine Muslims (Rohingyas) ending up principally in Bangladesh. Myanmar’s failure to integrate Rohingya Muslims and denial of rights is an internal issue of Myanmar. But, their forcible displacement to Bangladesh drags Bangladesh into a crisis. The present one is no different, but significantly different in scale and magnitude.

How many refugees from the Rakhine State is Bangladesh hosting at present?

There are 32,000 residual cases of Rohingya refugees (documented) from the flow of 1991-92. Myanmar never bothered to repatriate these people since 2005. About 300,000 to 400,000 undocumented Myanmar nationals moved to Bangladesh over the past decade due to policies of persecution and denial of rights. Many fled to other countries including Malaysia. The October 2016 incident resulted in an exodus of 87,000. And from August 25 up to now, 607,000 forcibly displaced Myanmar nationals have crossed over into Bangladesh, taking the total to about one million. And the exodus is still continuing. Bangladesh is presently hosting more Rohingyas than Myanmar. The Rohingya nucleus has now shifted to Bangladesh.

Does the international community offer financial aid to Bangladesh in order to resolve the refugees’ problems?

Over the years, the international community, international organizations such as International Organization for Migration (IOM), the UN and its relevant entities such as UNHCR, WFP, and UNICEF have been providing humanitarian assistance to the Rohingya refugees and the forcibly displaced Myanmar nationals staying in Bangladesh, but the vast majority of the support is being provided by the government of Bangladesh itself despite many resource constraints. Many international NGOs have been providing assistance to Rohingyas in all these years. In view of the formidable humanitarian needs stemming from the current crisis, the UN has prepared a revised response plan to the tune of USD 434 million for a six-month period against which an offer of $335 million was made by the international community in the pledging conference held in Geneva on 23 October 2017. However, this commitment and ultimate realization of it are hardly enough to support one million Rohingyas; 22% of these people were designated as extremely vulnerable by the IOM. Bangladesh will have to commit a lot more resources for these forcibly displaced residents of Myanmar. Then, there are various kinds of insecurities that cannot be quantified in monetary terms. Please note that Bangladesh is not asking for money; all we want is repatriation of these people in a safe, secured, dignified and sustainable manner.

Has the Bangladeshi government engaged itself in talks with officials from the current or previous government of Myanmar to deal with the people of Rakhine State in order to prevent their migration to Bangladesh?

The exodus of Rohingyas into Bangladesh is not migration in the first place, it is purely a case of forced displacement as part of what the international community calls ‘ethnic cleansing’. These people were in Rakhine for generations, much before Burma became independent in 1948. Old Akyab town was a town populated by people of Indian origin even in 1931. The bordering district of Maungdaw had more than 80% Muslims even a century earlier. Therefore, calling them migrants from BANGLADESH is historically wrong. The Baxter Committee way back in 1939 concluded that “for all intent and purposes” Muslims in Rakhine were an indigenized community. They trace their history in the old Rakhine kingdom back to the 9th century that started with Arab traders, and the community flourished in the capital Mro-haung (present day Mrauk-U) during the 15-18th century.   

From the very beginning of the Rohingya problem, which dates back to decades ago, Bangladesh has been persistently engaged with the Myanmar authorities at all levels, starting from highest political level to the level of officials and functionaries, to resolve the issue particularly to ensure repatriation of those who came from Myanmar. In fact, Bangladesh always took the first step. There have been numerous invitations sent from the Bangladeshi side to Myanmar for VVIP and high-level interactions/visits as well as proposals to Myanmar for repatriation and enhancing sectoral collaboration (in respect of security, road connectivity, shipping connectivity, gas-power sector etc.). There is a robust border agreement of 1980 that provides for return of illegal entrants. However, Myanmar has consistently shown indifference to this border arrangement and at times even sent negative responses to many overtures from Bangladesh to build interdependent and mutually beneficial bilateral relations. There is a clear lack of engagement on Myanmar’s part to engage on sectoral issues, not to talk about irregular movement, if any. But, Myanmar seeks to paint Rohingyas as illegal immigrants to delink them from civil and political rights. Whatever Myanmar has done recently in terms of bilateral engagements is entirely to make a show to the international community, while in reality they remain as obstinate as ever towards resolving the Rohingya issue.  

Certain sources have reported that Bangladesh is closing borders or mining border areas in order to prevent entry by refugees. Do you confirm these reports?

It is wrong. There are reports of Myanmar Army planting anti-personnel landmines and Bangladesh has protested that. The fact that we are hosting more than 600,000 forcibly displaced Myanmar nationals since August 25 alone and more are crossing over each day makes a response to these reports unnecessary. Besides, Bangladesh is signatory to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction. Myanmar is not a party to this Convention and is known to have been planting mines even along the Chinese and Thai borders. Hence, you should perhaps raise this with the Myanmar authorities which are laying landmines along the border to prevent return of their nationals from Bangladesh. Since 25 August, we have received a large number of forcibly displaced Myanmar nationals with mine injuries which only corroborates these reports.

How useful do you find steps taken by the international community in resolving problems of Rakhine residents in the short and long run?

The international community’s response has been far less than our expectation given the enormity and scale of the crisis particularly in the immediate term. Mere condemnation, exhortation, demands and engagements of international community with Myanmar have proved futile in stopping the exodus. Providing humanitarian assistance to Rohingyas in the Bangladesh side of the border must not absolve them of their responsibility. They must apply moral and diplomatic pressure on Myanmar to accept them and treat them with safety, security and dignity.

Yet, we have the Kofi Annan Commission recommendations which have been endorsed by the international community. We have the UN Secretary-General’s three action points (de-escalation of the situation, return of the Rohingyas and implementation of the Kofi Annan Commission report) on which there is broad understanding within the Security Council which resonate our Hon’ble Prime Minister’s five-point proposals. All these provide the road-map to a medium and long-term solution given that Myanmar implements them fully and with all sincerity. Here the international community has a huge responsibility to prevail upon Myanmar to do so.

Given the intensity of the conflicts between Muslims and Buddhists in Myanmar, how likely do you think it is to find a solution inside the borders of Myanmar?

The hatred and divisiveness are very deep-rooted. Myanmar majority is swayed by an extreme form of nationalism, where intolerance to religious and ethnic minorities are being accepted as the norm. Today it is targeted against the Rohingyas in particular and Muslims in general, tomorrow it could be targeted against another community. Christian communities in Kachin and Kayin are also being impacted by these negative forces. Hence any solution with equality of treatment for minorities would be difficult. But it is possible and it has to be.

As for the Rohingya crisis and atrocities, our Hon’ble Prime Minister has said ‘The crisis has its root in Myanmar and its solution has to be found in Myanmar’. This would require political good will of Myanmar authorities and sincere efforts of all stakeholders, most importantly a spirit of reconciliation and tolerance in the people of Myanmar. A whole of society approach would be crucial. And international community needs to get involved in this.

Despite the fact that the crisis in Rakhine started a few years ago, Islamic states have failed in practice to force Myanmar governments to undertake serious measures. What are the reasons for this failure?

We see it as an inherent problem as exemplified in dealing with other cases of persecution of Muslims taking place in various parts of the world. In other cases, concerned states stop at some point and situation gets somewhat addressed. In this case, sheer stubbornness, denial and non-receptiveness of Myanmar authorities is also to blame. Rather, one can see a clear pattern, that indicate a practice of ethnic cleaning in play.

Don’t you think that the international community should take more serious steps like sanctions against Myanmar military officials? 

We feel that the international community must take more serious and binding measures in this regard. We believe much more result oriented, specific and time bound pressure on Myanmar would create conducive environment for fruitful bilateral engagements which would pave the way for resolving the crisis. Moral and diplomatic pressure should be the beginning and need to be sustained to send a message to Myanmar that every wrong policy must come to an end and remedial measures must be taken. 

Some historians claim the Rohingya people are immigrants who fled from Bangladesh to Myanmar largely under the British government in Burma and to a lesser extent after Burma independence in 1948 and the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971. How is this historical claim applicable to Rohingya people?

The made-up narrative and claims of the Rohingyas as immigrants from Bangladesh is devoid of any economic and other rationales. In the past, Myanmar never complained about illegal immigration from Bangladesh. The majority of the historians narrate otherwise.

Rohingyas of Arakan are not a race group per se developed from one tribal group or a single racial stock. They are a mixed people from various races and cultures. Available historical records suggest that many centuries of human migration and settlement helped evolve Rohingya ethnicity in Arakan, presently called Rakhine. British historical and other past records account that Muslims in Rakhine existed long before its annexation by the British (1824). During 7th – 8th century Arab traders travelled to Arakan for business. During that period, they preached Islam to the locals. Rohingyas, who settled in Arakan/Rakhine after 1825 were indigenized well before independence of Burma in 1948. According to Baxter Committee Report, the percentage of Muslim population born in Arakan/ Rakhine was 77% in 1931. The Report also concluded that, all historical records suggest that the Rohingyas were indigenous to Arakan/Rakhine.

Insecurity and persecution as well as lack of economic rationale of movement to an impoverished land like the Rakhine State squarely contradict theory of illegal immigration from Bangladesh. Myanmar and Bangladesh have about similar GDP per capita. But Rakhine is much backward (with $750) in relation to neighbouring Chittagong (over $1800). Socio-political situation in Rakhine has been discriminatory and replete with persecution since 1948.

Given the economic deprivation, developmental challenges, lack of security, continued persecution, various kinds of dispossession, restriction on movement, and disenfranchisement in Rakhine State, illegal immigration from Bangladesh to Rakhine is unimaginable. Migration into such a land is absurd, when Rohingyas have been taking refuge elsewhere in hundreds of thousands such as in Saudi Arabia, India, UAE, Pakistan as well as Bangladesh. Censuses conducted by the British and recent ones by the Myanmar Government clearly contradict any claim of illegal immigration to Rakhine State, rather indicate net outflow of people from the State.

As a responsible country, Bangladesh would take back people who, if it is proven, entered Rakhine after 1971. We cannot be held responsible for any movement of people before Bangladesh was born. But this should not be taken out of context to term this Rohingya community illegal immigrants when they have a recorded history of a several generations and even centuries in Rakhine.