I read an English summary of
a really interesting article last week, by Rossen Yankov, a Bulgarian
journalist, who was advocating for the issuance of a European passport for the
Roma ethnic group, many of whom live in Bulgaria but being nomadic are really
stateless and should be given stateless citizenship/passports. “They are not
Bulgarian; they are European,” states Yankov.
The entire article, which was in Bulgarian, was difficult to translate,
but lest we think that Yankov is nothing but a warm and fuzzy humanitarian, the
objective behind his argument Is much like that of the majority in Myanmar:
Rohingya may live here, and may have lived here for generations, but this isn’t
really their nationality, so why should we have to bear the sole burden of caring
for them? Of course, Myanmar doesn’t
spend any time thinking up solutions like Mr Yankov; they just torment and kill
their ethnic minority, forcing them to either get out or die. Which got me thinking: there are two types of
nomads in the word: nomads by tradition, like the Roma, the Tuareg, the Berber
. . . and then there are nomads by necessity, like the Rohingya.
Shouldn’t the Rohingya be
considered nomadic now? Expelled from
their country of origin—and make no mistake, Myanmar is where these particular
individuals originated—they are forced to wander the world in search of
employment, sustenance, peace. And if they
are considered nomads, wouldn’t the Roma/EU argument apply—that they should be
given stateless citizenship/passports?
Some governments make
concessions for nomads—access to
pasture, participation in government, voting rights that are fluid across
states depending on where the Nomad is in the yearly travel cycle. Some nomads stay within country borders, some
do not.
So what happens if a country
through torture, genocide and exile, creates a nomadic tribe, and the world
through its inaction is complicit in this creation-- should that group not
be given the same opportunities that the traditional group receives?
Of the Roma, the largest minority in Europe, Yankov says, “They
are the eternal strangers here, there, and everywhere else. . . . They are the
true Europeans.”
The Rohingya, also, are eternal strangers everywhere. Are they now not the true Asians?
No comments :
Post a Comment