1947 DOCUMENTS BETWEEN JAMIATUL-ULAMA (the party of the

Arakan Muslims), and BRITISH OFFICIALS, ARE REVEALING

by Rick Heizman, July, 2014, San Francisco

THERE ARE SEVERAL POINTS OF INTEREST IN THESE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE
VERY RELEVANT TO THE SITUATION,
AND ESPECIALLY TO THE PERCEPTION OF THE CURRENT SITUATION IN ARAKAN:

1) In these documents, notice that the Muslims NEVER used the term ‘Rohingya’ to
describe or label themselves. They always referred to themselves as ‘the Muslims’ or
‘Arakan Muslims’. They identify themselves by religion more than anything else, and
more than anyone else.
(example: the Chin, Kachin, and Karen (Kayin) don’t call themselves ‘the Christians’ or
the ‘Chin Christians’, ‘Kachin Christians’, or ‘Karen Christians’. And the Burmese don’t
call themselves ‘the Buddhists’, or the ‘Burmese Buddhists’.
These days, ignorant and misguided Western writers and journalists - who think they
know everything even better than the indigenous Rakhine Buddhists - are often
screeching to others that those people who object to using the term ‘Rohingya’, and
instead refer to them as ‘Bengali Muslims’, or simply ‘Bengalis’ are exhibiting bigotry and
ignorance - when actually those accusers are the ones trying to impose their own
ignorance and bigotry, and showing that they have no qualms about falsely accusing
and demonizing an entire Buddhist Culture that is deeply rooted in their own homeland.
IF THE MUSLIMS DID NOT USE THE TERM ‘ROHINGYA’ AT THAT TIME,
THEN IT PROVES THAT IT WAS MADE UP FOR A DEVIOUS PURPOSE.
There is already plenty of proof that ‘Rohingya’ is a recently made term to use - along with
a made-up history - in order to fool people into sympathizing with the unbridled victimhood,
and tacitly supporting their real aims of seizing the land of the Rakhine Buddhists,
demonizing the Buddhists so that they have no support, and eliminating them. People who
don’t believe that are simply people that don’t know the history and the incidents that have
occurred making their goal more and more in reach.
And, don’t be fooled by any notion that they will be happy and content to be granted
Burmese citizenship. They do NOT want to be part of an infidel-led country, and they will
simply use citizenship as a way to gain a population superiority and then leave the nation
of Burma / Myanmar.
1
8efore Lhls ume, Lhe Musllms were called '8engall-Musllms' or 'Chluagong-Musllms' (whlch lndlcaLe
LhaL Lhey came from ouLslde 8urma) by Lhe 8rlush, Lhemselves, and oLhers. 8eLween Lhe end of WWll and
lndependence Lhey began Lo use Lhe Lerm 'Arakan Musllms' ln order Lo showcase Lhemselves as belng as
deeply lmbedded ln Lhe land of Arakan as Lhe 8uddhlsLs - desplLe Lhe facL LhaL Lhelr 8engall language
(speclñcally 'Chluagonglan 8engall' because mosL of Lhem came from Chluagong) ls nC1 a language from
Arakan. 1o help Lhls manlpulauve eñorL Lhey concocLed a new and preposLerous hlsLory - see number 3
below. ulumaLely, Lhe Lerm 'Arakan Musllms' falled lL's sly purpose, and Lhen Lhe Lerm '8ohlngya' -
unknown Lo anyone lncludlng Lhe Musllms - sLarLed Lo appear and be used.
2) These papers also show the objections, and even disgust, that officials had with the
demand of the Muslims to have a State or Territory made for one particular religion.
The Governor of Burma - H. E. Rance - wrote in response, “Religion itself cannot be the
basis of nationality. It has no precedent in Burma or in the world”.
Sultan Ahmed, leader of the main party of the Muslims - Jamiatul-ulama-e Islam - and
other top Muslim leaders were inspired by and communicating with the leaders of soon-to-
be Pakistan, which would be carved out of India purely because of religion - the Muslims
of India demanded their own country - Ghandi was aghast.
Some of the Arakan Muslims advocated joining Pakistan, others wanted a separate
country - both ways would require war in order to break it off from the nation of Burma.
3) In these papers, Sultan Ahmed puts forth the new and preposterous history of the ‘Arakan
Muslims’. He claims Muslims ‘settled down in Arakan about the year 788’.
It is in the 7th century that Mohammed lived and Islam began - and Arakan was 5000 long
miles away. It took many centuries for Islam to even reach half of that distance. It was in
the 13th century that the Bengal area and the Turkish lands even started to become
Muslim. The famous ancient Buddhist university of Nalanda, in India, was entirely
destroyed by Muslim invaders in the late 12th century, and the great Buddhist Pala
Kingdom succumbed to the Muslim conquest in the 13th century. Turkish lands started
changing to Islam in the 13th century, and its Roman Empire capital of Constantinople
(now Istanbul) fell to the Muslim armies in the 15th century. It is abundantly clear that such
statements as Sultan Ahmed put forth (and are once again being touted today) about
Muslims arriving in Arakan in the 8th century, are undisputedly false fantasy, backed by no
evidence, and impossible to be true.

His claims that the Muslims and Buddhists lived side by side peacefully are simply
romanticized history to conceal real history. Indian historians claim that during 5 centuries
of Muslim conquest and rule about 80 million Hindus (and Buddhists) were killed in
Indian lands - which included Bengal.

And, even more galling is his mention of the 1942 massacre in Maungdaw, of 40,000
Buddhists by Muslims using British weapons that were supposed to be used against the
Japanese invaders - but Sultan Ahmed called it ‘communal riots’ when ’40,000 innocent
people’ were killed.
True, they were innocent. 40,000 Buddhists killed, hundreds of Buddhist villages burned,
more than 100,000 Buddhist refugees fled for their lives.
It is the largest massacre in contemporary Burmese history, and the only one to be
properly called a GENOCIDE in the correct definition of the word.
2
PlsLory shows whaL Arakan would be llke Loday, lf lL had become a Musllm SLaLe:
ln 1948, Lhe populauon of LasL ÞaklsLan, (laLer becomes 8angladesh) lncluded 28° Plndu people, now
Lhere are 9°. 8angladesh was overwhelmlngly 8uddhlsL for many many cenLurles, now Lhe remalnlng
8uddhlsLs are 0.7° - less Lhan one percenL of Lhe populauon.
ln 1948, ÞaklsLan had abouL 20° Plndu, 8uddhlsL, Chrlsuan, and Slkh. now: 1.6° Plndu, 1.8° Chrlsuan,
0.18° 8uddhlsL, 0.06° Slkh, LoLal abouL 3.3° non-Musllms.

HERE ARE THE
DOCUMENTS:



























3
1hls eñorL, as documenLed ln Lhese hlsLorlc leuers of 1947 falled (for Lhe Musllms) and on !anuary 4,
1948, 8urma became lndependenL. 1hls meanL noLhlng Lo Lhe Musllms - Lhey had oLher plans.
Cn !une 9, 1948 Lhe Mu[ahld ÞarLy senL a leuer - !" $%&'!($' - Lo Lhe new governmenL of 1he unlon of
8urma. lL was a llsL of demands, lncludlng:
1he areas beLween Lhe kaladan and naaf rlvers musL be recognlzed as Lhe nauonal Pome of Lhe Musllms of
8urma (and Lhls ls Lhe land Lhey had eLhnlcally cleansed of 8uddhlsLs ln Lhe lasL 6 years!)
1he Mu[ahld ÞarLy musL be granLed legal sLaLus as a pollucal organlzauon ln Lhe new governmenL of 8urma
(and Lhls parLy preaches holy war agalnsL Lhe 8uddhlsLs who have llved Lhere for cenLurles!)
1he Mu[ahldln ñghLers who had been capLured and [alled (for slaughLerlng 8uddhlsLs, and burnlng and
desLroylng vlllages, Lemples and monasLerles) musL be uncondluonally released.
.......and Lhose were [usL Lhree of Lhe demands.
1he new cenLral governmenL, sull Lrylng Lo recover from Lhe assasslnauon of 8ogyoke Aung San - 8urma's
hero, faLher-ñgure, and hope for Lhe new lndependenL counLry - refused Lhese ouLrageous demands, and
qulckly Lhe Musllms ln norLhern Arakan declared [lhad (holy war) on 8urma.
1he Mu[ahldln launched a vlclous campalgn and desLroyed all Lhe 8uddhlsL vlllages ln norLhern Maungdaw
1ownshlp (Lhe souLhern parLs had been desLroyed 6 years earller).
 4
False and impossible history:



 5
 6
 7

 8



 9
The British response:
 10
The ‘memorialists’ refer to some of the Muslims , who believe
that they were granted the right to form their own Muslim State
in exchange for helping the British fight the Japanese - there
seems to be no basis for this - and no evidence or corroboration.
 11
 12