U.N. Says Military-Violence in Myanmar Maybe 'Crimes Against Humanity'

For those asking why the UN is saying "maybe", it's because the High Commissioner for Human Rights is not allowed to make the legal determination about whether a country or any entities have committed a crime against humanity. Only the UNSC & UNGA (and subsidiary bodies) or international courts like the ICC or a specialist International Tribunal can make that determination.

The High Commissioner's role is to perform an investigation and alert the UNSC, UNGA, and UNHRC to potential crimes while also gathering evidence. It's then up to those bodies, which are run by their member countries, to take it further.

> may be

Well there is a decisive response, the UN getting things done as usual.

But they say:

> To outside nations, Bachelet advises placing sanctions on Myanmar that will cut off the military's arms supply, cutting relationships with businesses tied to the Tatmadaw and providing long-term assistance to those fleeing the country.

Asking for sanctions implies they believe it is and are treading lightly.

But the fact that this post only has one (1) comment 4 hours later implies that no one cares, and those that do are also likely heavily focused on UKR right now.

What's "maybe"? UN isn't sure? And still saying stuff?

And what ever happened to the Rohingya genocide? Does UN have any courage to deter wrongful actions anymore?

The article proudly notes Suu Kyi's "Nobel peace prize".. like under whose power a genocide happened and didn't even speak a word against it? rather supported this same military's action in the UN [1]? Very peaceful indeed. Who awards these "peace" prizes even?

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20200125025717/https://www.aljaz...