Background Guide: United Nations Human Rights

Council

Agenda: Protection and promotion of the rights

of refugees with special emphasis on the
Middle-East and the European Refugee Crises
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

A Brief History
The history of the current EU refugee crisis traces back to World War II (WWII) when displaced
persons’ (DP) camps were established in Germany, Italy, and Austria to house refugees from
Eastern Europe and protect the former inmates of Nazi German concentration camps. Two
years after the war ended, some 850,000 refugees were still in these camps, many of whom
were in need of new homes after repatriation.

It was during the late 1940s and early 1950s that the first European countries began
establishing large-scale immigration programs. After Belgium brought in 22,000 displaced
persons in 1974, other nations also started accepting refugees into their borders. By 1953,
most DPs had either been resettled to other EU nations or accepted by Germany and Austria.

After WWII, the 1951 Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees was held.
Twenty-six states came together and agreed upon a clear definition for the term ‘refugee.’ The
conference offered the mostcomprehensivedefinition of the rights of refugees at the
international level and laid out the most fundamental principles of non-discrimination, non-
penalization, and non-refoulement — refugees cannot be discriminated against because of
their race, religion, or country of origin, refugees cannot be penalized for their illegal entry, and
no refugee can be returned to a place where he/she fears threats to life. This protocol was
revised in 1967 to remove time limits and geographical limitations. Following the introduction
of the 1951 Convention, the Common European Asylum System was established to provide
asylum to migrants fleeing their home country. The system includes the Asylum Procedures
Directive that aims to produce the best asylum decisions, the Reception Conditions Directive
that ensures the basic rights of each asylum-seeker are respected, the Dublin Regulation
examines the state responsible for examining applications, and the EURODAC Regulation that
will grant law enforcement access to a database of fingerprints of asylum-seekers.

From the 1970s to the early 2000s, many African and Middle Eastern countries suffered from
political instability and civil wars. In the 1980s, various Somalian groups began fighting for
power during a power vacuum. Militant groups are still struggling against the Somali
government to this day. The border conflicts between Eritrea and Ethiopia first sparked in
1998, but the conflict continues to cause disturbance in the two nations today.Afghanistan, the
leading country of origin for refugees, has been a battleground for NATO and al-Qaeda forces
for over a decade. Finally, the Syrian Civil War that started in 2011 has forced millions out of
the country to seek a safe place to settle. Delegates are encouraged to extensively research the
details of these conflicts to better understand the core reason behind the influx of migrants into
Europe.

Over the years, the death toll of migrants by drowning as they try to enter Europe has
drastically increased. The problem of shipwrecks in the Mediterranean came into the spotlight
in 2009, after a smuggler’sboat carrying over 500migrants capsized. Subsequent similar
accidents eventually caused Italy to introduce Operation Mare Nostrum in late 2013. The
rescue operation was very successful in saving migrant lives — over 150,000 asylum-seekers
safely reached Europe during the year this was in use. After spending €9million per month on
the operation without any requested support from other EU member states, the Italian
government officially ended the operation in late 2014.

2
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

Definition of Key Terminologies:

Refugee: According to the 1951 Refugee Convention, a refugee is someone who is "owing to a
well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of
a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is
unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country."

Asylum seeker: An asylum seeker is a person who has fled from his or her own country due to
fear of persecution and has applied for (legal and physical) protection in another country but
has not yet had their claim for protection assessed. A person remains an asylum seeker until
their protection ‘status’ has been determined.

Note: The terms asylum-seeker and refugee are often confused: an asylum-seeker is someone
who seeks asylum when he has already entered the host country. A refugee is someone who
applies for refuge in another country and on approval of the request, crosses the border to
reach the other country.

Genocide: Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole
or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

Types of Conflicts:

International Armed Conflict: International armed conflict as defined in the Geneva

Conventions is essentially similar to traditional legal notions of the concept of ‘war’ – an armed
conflict between two or more states. Article 2, common to the Four Conventions, provides that:

…the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed
conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if
the state of war is not recognized by one of them. The Convention shall also apply to all
cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if
the said occupation meets with no armed resistance…
With the adoption of the Additional Protocols in 1977, a new category of international
armed conflict was added. Under Additional Protocol I, an international armed conflict
will exist in situations: in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and
alien occupation and racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination, as
enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of
International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in
accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

3
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

Non-International Armed Conflict: The Geneva Conventions also cover non-

international armed conflicts, which are defined in Common Article 3 as 'armed conflict not of
an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties'.
When the laws of war were revisited in the 1970s, it was determined that there should be more
laws regulating non-international armed conflicts. Additional Protocol II, therefore, applies to:
… all armed conflicts not covered by Article 1 … of Protocol I and which take place in the
territory of a High Contracting Party between its armed forces and dissident armed forces or
other organized armed groups which, under responsible command, exercise such control over
a part of its territory as to enable them to carry out sustained and concerted military
operations and to implement this protocol. However, Additional Protocol II is limited by a
number of qualifiers. Before the Protocol can be triggered, dissident forces have to exercise
control over part of their host State’s territory. The fighting must be sustained or protracted,
and rise above mere 'internal tensions', 'riots', and other 'isolated and sporadic acts of
violence.' Whether or not the Protocol applies is also dependent on the dissident forces being
able to 'implement' the Protocol. So, where an armed group does not retain some measure of
territorial control or is unable to implement the Protocol, the Protocol does not apply. In
addition, the issue of multiple non-State parties to the conflict is not addressed. Unlike
Common Article 3, which foresees the possibility of multiple dissident groups engaging in a
non-international armed conflict, Protocol II applies only in situations of armed conflict
between a dissident armed group and the armed forces of a High Contracting Party and not as
between different armed groups. Also, any situation where there is no recognized government
– only insurgent or opposition groups fighting one another for control – results in the
inapplicability of Protocol II. The cumulative effect of these restrictions is that Protocol II
remains significantly more limited than Common Article 3.

Principle of non-refoulement.
Refoulement means the expulsion of persons who have the right to be recognized as refugees.
The principle of non-refoulement has first been laid out in 1954 in the UN-Convention relating
to the Status of Refugees, which, in Article 33(1) provides that: "No Contracting State shall
expel or return ('refouler') a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories
where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality,
membership of a particular social group or political opinion."

It is important to note, that the principle of nonrefoulement does not only forbid the expulsion
of refugees to their country of origin but to any country in which they might be subject to
persecution. The only possible exception provided for by the UN Convention is the case that the
person to be expelled constitutes a danger to national security. Although the principle of non-
refoulement is universally accepted, problems with refoulement frequently arise through the
fact, that its application requires a recognized refugee status. However, not all countries are
members of the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or may not have established
formal procedures for determining refugee status.

The principle of non-refoulement has been derived from the following instruments:

1. 1951 Refugee Convention-

2. Article 13 of the ICCPR
3. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment

4
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

4. The organisation of African Unity Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of

Refugee Problems in Africa, and many more

Political Rights
The Refugees Convention: The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (‘1951
Convention’) has no explicit provision dealing with the political rights of refugees. However,
Article 2 makes it clear that refugees have duties to the country of asylum, including respect for
its laws and for measures taken for the maintenance of public order.

This merely reflects the general rule that aliens fall within the territorial sovereignty of the host
State. Regional refugee instruments also protect the political rights of refugees in a post-
conflict area.

Customary International Law: Prior to the emergence of human rights law (and
contemporary refugee law), limited protection existed for aliens under international law,
reflecting their generally low status in society. However, it has long been recognized that the
State of nationality is entitled to demand that the host country treats the former’s citizens in a
manner compatible with the minimum standard set down in customary international law. This
right of the country of origin stems from its retention of personal supremacy over expatriate
nationals, even though the host State possesses territorial supremacy.

Human Rights Law: The emergence of human rights law over the last fifty years has had a
tremendous impact on the position of aliens, and therefore refugees, in international law. In
general, human rights law does not distinguish between aliens and citizens. The notable
exception is with regard to the right to participate in an electoral process.

Article 25 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ('ICCPR') only
guarantees the right to vote and to stand for public office for citizens of a country. Although
States are not obliged to give aliens the right to vote, they do have the discretion to allow them
to participate in elections.

In some cases, States may undertake to provide voting rights to resident aliens pursuant to a
particular treaty arrangement. For example, the 1992 European Convention on Participation of
Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level requires State parties to allow foreigners who have
lawfully been resident in their territory for five years the right to vote in local elections. As for
the participation of refugees in elections in their country of origin, Article 25 of the ICCPR
states that citizens have the right to vote and stand for election 'without unreasonable
restrictions'. Accordingly, Article 25 recognizes that States should be allowed to set certain
conditions, such as age limits, on the voting rights of citizens.

The Human Rights Committee10 in its General Comment 25 (1996), while noting that Article
25 prohibited arbitrary discrimination between citizens, considered that a registration
requirement, itself dependent on residence, would be justifiable.

Many more rights are given to the refugees under the IHRL. Please note that violations to the
International Human Rights Law merely depends on ratification and accession by a country.

Current Situation

5
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

Since 2013, there has been a rapid increase in the number of migrants attempting to enter
Europe by crossing the Mediterranean. The EU countries saw a 24% increase in the number of
asylum applications from the first half of 2013 to the first half of 2014. Compared to the same
time period in 2014, there is a sharp 149% rise in the number of migrants crossed into Europe
from January to May 2015.
As violence continues in Syria, Afghanistan, Eritrea, Somalia, and other Middle Eastern/African
nations, more people are choosing to take the risk of entering Europe. The deadliest and most
recent shipwreck accident (as of writing) occurred on April 19th, 2015. A boat packed with
over850 migrants had just left Tripoli, Libya and was 190 km away from Lampedusa, a
southern Italian island when the vessel capsized. Evidence suggests that the cause of the
accident had to do with all the passengers moving to one side of the boat when a ship
approached.
Despite a vigorous rescue mission by Malta and Italy, there were only 28 survivors; most of
those on board were from Eritrea or Senegal. Many passengers drowned not because of the
initial capsize, but because they were trapped in the lower levels of the ship.
After the April 2015 accident, EU ministers responded by tripling the budget of Operation
Triton.
Before Operation Triton was introduced, Operation Mare Nostrum, funded mainly by Italy,
proved to be more effective in searching and rescuing. Triton focuses more on border
protection, and operates closer to the Italian coast. Because of the correlation between the
termination of Mare Nostrum and an increase in the number of deaths in the Mediterranean,
some have suggested renewing the operation.
In May 2015, Jean-Claude Junker, the President of the European Commissions, offered a
possible solution to the EU migrant crisis — a quota system. As a part of the proposal, the EU is
to accept20,000 asylum applications in the next two years, and each member state will be
required to take in a certain number of refugees.
The plan takes into consideration the capabilities of each country and adjusts for these
differences, and aims to fairly distribute the refugees among 28 countries. Germany, France,
Italy, and Austria have shown their support for such a system; a mandatory quota for each
nation will ease the burden of receiving asylum applications for Germany and Italy. However,
most countries stand against the proposal. Spain, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary
reject any involuntary quota system, labeling the idea "mad and unfair" (Viktor Orban,
Hungary's Prime Minister).
With less than a qualified majority agreeing to the quota plan, the proposal was refused by EU
member states in June. Other efforts to combat the migrant crisis include stopping smuggler
boats and sending them back to Libya, but many believe that it is unethical to force displaced
people back into the danger.
But such EU operations have failed to successfully thwart migrant trafficking in the past, and it
is unlikely that member states will start combating smugglers using military forces, at least not
in the near future.
While it is obvious that EU nations need a system of accommodating more refugees, some
nations have made their reluctance to accept asylum applications very clear. In August 2015,
many migrants settled in Calais, France in an attempt to cross the Channel Tunnel into the UK.
Even though the number of people in Calais makes up less than 1% of the total migrants
entering Europe, Britain has responded by sending sniff dogs and fencing to France to stop

6
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

asylum-seekers. David Cameron, the British Prime Minister, stands by his claim that the
only way to solve the migrant crisis is to increase deportations rather than open up UK borders.
Countries such as Lithuania, Estonia, and Slovakia also stand against being compelled to accept
more refugees, despite the fact that less than 1,000 asylum- seekers apply to those nations
voluntarily. The current EU response to the influx of migrants is clearly not enough, and
nations must come together to find a solution to the problem before another ship full of
desperate refugees sinks in the Mediterranean. It is time for Europe to stand together and find
a feasible and moral answer to the refugee crisis.

Case Study
Syrian Arab Republic
An estimated 9 million Syrians have fled their homes since the outbreak of civil war in March
2011, taking refuge in neighboring countries or within Syria itself. According to the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), over 3 million have fled to Syria's
immediate neighbors Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq. 6.5 million are internally displaced
within Syria.
Meanwhile, under 150,000 Syrians have declared asylum in the European Union, while
member states have pledged to resettle a further 33,000 Syrians. The vast majority of these
resettlement spots – 28,500 or 85% – are pledged by Germany.
The humanitarian situation has continued to deteriorate with uninterrupted violence and
conflict. The progression of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) across large areas of
Syria has severely impacted on civilians, with reports of grave violations of human rights in
areas under their control. Hostilities have damaged and destroyed emergency field hospitals,
schools, water, and electricity services in densely populated areas where both local
communities and the internally displaced reside. The total number of people in need of
humanitarian assistance in Syria has reached 12.2 million, approximately 7.6 million of whom
are internally displaced; the largest number of internally displaced persons in any country in
the world.

Major Problems:

The magnitude of humanitarian needs is overwhelming in all parts of the country.

Main priorities are treating and evacuating the wounded, providing food aid, water, sanitation
and hygiene, health, and shelter. Prices of basic commodities continue rising and the
availability of food stocks in many parts of Syria is at risk.
With 10 million people in need of shelter, the winter season presents higher fuel prices,
additional shelter needs, health risks (e.g. acute respiratory infections); while insecurity
further restricts access to health centers for treatment and care. Children and the elderly are
most at risk. Protection remains of utmost concern, with very serious allegations of abuses
reported against women and children adding to the persistent reports of indiscriminate killings
and extrajudicial arrests. In the area of health, the long-lasting consequences of the conflict
have left many without access to basic medical care.

7
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

Reports estimate that more Syrians die due to health complications resulting from
inadequate health care services than as a direct consequence of the violence. Medical facilities
continue to be targeted by aerial bombardments, resulting in fatalities and destruction of
facilities.

Statistics Relating to Refugees:

The number of Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries has reached a staggering 3.8 million.
The UN agency for refugees (UNHCR) has declared its Syria operation the largest in the
agency's history. Countries bordering Syria are approaching a dangerous saturation point,
particularly Lebanon where there are over 1.1 million refugees. In Lebanon, shelter remains a
serious concern for the vast majority of refugee families, while the number of house evictions
and dismantling of informal refugee settlements is increasing. The government's recent
decision to change its visa policy further complicates the already dire situation of the refugees.
In Iraq, 95% of Syrian refugees reside in the Kurdish Region, there are growing concerns about
the capacities of the local government, communities and humanitarian organizations amidst
the serious crisis in the country. In Turkey, UNHCR reports that more than 1.1 million Syrians
have taken refuge in the country since the outbreak of the crisis in 2011. Over 200,000 Syrian
refugees arrived in Turkey since the ISIL military offensive on the Kurdish enclave of Ayn al-
Arab/Kobane in mid-September. In Jordan, access to health care by Syrian refugees has been
limited by a recent decree by the Government of Jordan, which ended the free provision of
secondary Health Care and treatment of chronic illnesses for Syrian refugees. This has forced
some refugees to seek access to health services in refugee camps as a result, further straining
resources in the camps. In recent weeks the region has been hit by extreme winter weather
conditions which have increased the needs of refugees who are in sub-standard
accommodation or shelters and hindered the delivery of aid to those in need. Humanitarian
efforts have focused on reinforcing winter assistance, expanding distribution of in-kind winter
items, providing emergency cash assistance, weatherproofing of informal settlements, and
repairs of damaged shelters.

Israel – Palestine
The case of refugees is made special partly by the unique definition of the Palestinian refugees
defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June
1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948
conflict.” The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including legally adopted children, are
also eligible for registration.
UNRWA is unique in terms of its longstanding commitment to one group of refugees. It has
contributed to the welfare and human development of four generations of Palestine refugees.
UNRWA services are available to all those living in its areas of operations who meet this
definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. When the Agency
began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees.
Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services. Following the 1948
Arab-Israeli conflict, UNRWA was established by United Nations General Assembly resolution
302 (IV) of 8 December 1949 to carry out direct relief and works programs for Palestine
refugees. The Agency began operations on 1 May 1950. In the absence of a solution to the

8
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

Palestine refugee problem, the General Assembly has repeatedly renewed UNRWA's
mandate, most recently extending it until 30 June 2017.

The Israeli viewpoint:

Israeli officials reject the claim of absolute "right of return" for all Palestinian refugees and
displaced persons on several points. According to Israel, the absolute right of return for all
Palestinian refugees and displaced persons is a direct threat to Israeli statehood. There are
concerns that the return of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and their offspring would
interfere with the area's demographic composition. Further, some fear that a number of
refugees might constitute a security threat and upon readmission could band with other
Palestinian extremists to target Israel.
Instead, Israelis contend that an agreement on the refugee situation should be based on three
interrelated components: the resettlement of refugees and their descendants in the nations
where they currently reside, international efforts to improve quality of life in refugee camps,
and restricted readmission based exclusively on humanitarian considerations. Moreover,
refuting the central Palestinian claim for the absolute right of return, Israelis argue that U.N.
Resolution 194 was only passed with the status of a nonbinding recommendation. Other
Israelis argue that absolute "right of return" is inconsistent with historical circumstances
because the Palestinian refugee and displaced persons problem is a direct result of the 1948
and 1967 wars, which were forced upon Israel by relentless hostility from her Arab neighbors.
The first round of final status negotiations on the bilateral level between Israel and the
Palestinians opened in May 1996. As the two sides prepared to begin addressing the most
sensitive and difficult issues of the entire peace process, on the issue of refugees, Israel
maintained that it would offer conditioned compensation based on reciprocal compensation for
the property of Jews expelled from Arab countries. In private, however, Israeli officials say they
expect that in the end most refugees, with the exception of those in Lebanon under unique
circumstances, will remain in place aided by international funds, with continued limited
readmission based on humanitarian conditions.

The Palestinian viewpoint:

Palestinians demand the absolute "right of return" into the area of Mandatory Palestine for all
Palestinian refugees of the 1948 war. As previously mentioned, this claim is primarily based on
the standing U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194.
In accordance with this position, Palestinian officials generally oppose the establishment of any
projects which imply permanence or encourage Palestinians to remain where they are. In the
Palestinian view, such projects would be inconsistent with the claim of the "right of return" and
they are not interested in promoting any projects they feel might compromise this claim in the
future.
Therefore, the Palestinians have generally refused the initiation of any housing projects inside
refugee camps. This is not to say, however, that Palestinian officials do not express interest in
improving the conditions of Palestinians in refugee camps or enthusiastically encourage
financing of permanent housing projects in "non-refugee" communities. As they approach the
final status negotiations, it is clear that the Palestinians will continue to maintain their claim for
absolute "right of return." However, most Palestinian officials admit that realistically there
would be a need to limit the number of refugees permitted to return to the West Bank and Gaza
due to the limited ability of the Palestinian Authority to adequately absorb such massive

9
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

numbers of people. Therefore, some Palestinian officials have said they could be willing to
accept the idea of refugee repatriation into Jordan and Syria.
Also, for this reason, the demand for the right to return for displaced Palestinians from the
1967 war has not been as ardent as for those refugees from 1948.

Socio-Economic Problems:
UNRWA's Microcredit and Microenterprise program, created in 1991, offers credit to create
employment. It provides loans to existing and start-up enterprises. The program has developed
credit products to improve the economic and social conditions of poor micro-entrepreneurs,
small businesses, impoverished women and working-class families.
Since 2000, UNRWA programs in the occupied territories have also tried to protect vulnerable
refugees from the worst effects of the ongoing conflict and occupation. These effects have
included death and injury, with more than 3,700 Palestinians killed and 29,000 injured;
widespread destruction of property – both housing and agricultural land – and infrastructure;
and the crippling of the local economy by Israel's complex system of checkpoints and restricted
access. The last also makes delivery of humanitarian aid more costly and difficult.

Relationship between Israel and Palestine refugees:

It should be noted, for a start, that UNRWA only determines refugee status for service
eligibility, not for the purposes of rights or protection under the 1951 Refugee Convention.
Palestinian refugees under the care of UNRWA are excluded from the Convention under Article
1 D. However, that same Article notes that such persons would be eligible for Convention
protections if their situation is not otherwise “definitively settled in accordance with the
relevant resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations.”
In other words, the international community insisted on multiple layers of protection for
Palestinian refugees from the outset:
UNRWA, the 1951 Convention in UNRWA's absence, and a requirement that their situation is
resolved in accordance with relevant UNGAR resolutions, meaning UNGAR 194 (1948).
Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are, de jure, citizens of the State of Palestine. Given this,
do they, therefore, lose their refugee status or representation (or, more accurately, would they
lose the former under UNHCR/Convention rules)? This concern was raised by some Palestinian
refugee advocates at the time that Palestine applied to the UN for recognition as a state, and has
also been raised by others as invalidating Palestinian refugee claims and status. However,
despite UN recognition, in no way can Palestine be considered a de facto functioning state, able
to provide protection for its citizens. Therefore, no country—not even Israel—has seriously
claimed that recognition of Palestine invalidates the refugee status of Palestinian refugees in
the West Bank and Gaza.
Moreover, UNGAR 67/19 2012 on the "Status of Palestine in the United Nations" explicitly
invokes prior UN resolutions (including UNGAR 194). The Israeli government in particular has
no interest in pursuing this, since this would result in termination of UNRWA services in these
areas, severely destabilizing the PA while enabling Hamas to assume full control over the Gaza
education system— something it has been anxious to avoid. Indeed, Israeli officials continue to
urge donor countries to increase, not reduce, their financial support for the Agency in these
areas.

10
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

Rohingya Muslims
The Rohingya, who numbered around one million in Myanmar at the start of 2017, is one of the
many ethnic minorities in the country. Rohingya Muslims represent the largest percentage of
Muslims in Myanmar, with the majority living in Rakhine state. They have their own language
and culture and say they are descendants of Arab traders and other groups who have been in
the region for generations. But the government of Myanmar, a predominantly Buddhist
country, denies the Rohingya citizenship and even excluded them from the 2014 census,
refusing to recognize them as a people. It sees them as illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.
Since the 1970s, Rohingya have migrated across the region in significant numbers. Estimates of
their numbers are often much higher than official figures. In the last few years, before the latest
crisis, thousands of Rohingya were making perilous journeys out of Myanmar to escape
communal violence or alleged abuses by the security forces.
The latest exodus began on 25 August 2017 after Rohingya Arsa militants launched deadly
attacks on more than 30 police posts.
Rohingyas arriving in an area known as Cox's Bazaar - a district in Bangladesh - say they fled
after troops, backed by local Buddhist mobs, responded by burning their villages and attacking
and killing civilians. At least 6,700 Rohingya, including at least 730 children under the age of
five, were killed in the month after the violence broke out, according to Medecins Sans
Frontieres (MSF). Amnesty International says the Myanmar military also raped and abused
Rohingya women and girls. At least 288 villages were partially or totally destroyed by fire in
northern Rakhine state after August 2017, according to an analysis of satellite imagery by
Human Rights Watch. Human Rights Watch says most damages occurred in Maungdaw
Township, between 25 August and 25 September 2017 - with many villages destroyed after 5
September, when Myanmar's de facto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, said security force operations
had ended. The UN says the Rohingya's situation is the "world's fastest growing refugee crisis".
Before August, there were already around 307,500 Rohingya refugees living in camps,
makeshift settlements and host communities, according to the UNHCR. A further 687,000 are
estimated to have arrived since August 2017. Most Rohingya refugees reaching Bangladesh -
men, women, and children with barely any belongings - have sought shelter in these areas,
setting up camp wherever possible in the difficult terrain and with little access to aid, safe
drinking water, food, shelter or healthcare. Nearby countries like India have also denied asylum
to the Rohingya Muslims due to their religion as they consider them to be a threat to their own
national security.
Bangladesh has been the only silver lining in this situation as all the asylum seekers and
refugees have been provided proper aid and care by the government of Bangladesh by the
setting up of refugee camps and all necessary facilities. The largest refugee camp is Kutupalong
but limited space means spontaneous settlements have sprung up in the surrounding
countryside and nearby Balukhali as refugees keep arriving. While numbers in the Kutupalong
refugee camp have reduced from a high of 22,241 to 13,900, the number living in makeshift or
spontaneous settlements outside the camp has climbed from 99,495 to more than 604,000.
The need for aid is overwhelming. With the monsoon season approaching, work has begun to
re-locate some refugees from the camps most at risk of flooding or landslides and in other sites,
work has been taking place to improve drainage channels and strengthen shelters. ¬ About
70% of the one million refugees are now receiving food aid, according to the Inter Sector

11
BACKGROUND GUIDE: UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

Coordination Group report from mid-April 2011. Almost 100,000 people have been
treated for malnutrition ¬ Large-scale vaccination programs have been launched to try to
minimize the risk of disease. By mid-January 2018, 315,000 children under 15 years of age had
received a five-in-one vaccination, including cover for diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough.
47,639 temporary emergency latrines have been built Bangladesh military There has been
widespread condemnation of the Myanmar government's actions but talk of sanctions has been
more muted: ¬ The UN Security Council appealed to Myanmar to stop the violence but no
sanctions have been imposed
The UN's human rights chief ZeidRa'ad al-Hussein has said an act of genocide against Rohingya
Muslims by state forces in Myanmar cannot be ruled out ¬ The US urged Myanmar's troops to
"respect the rule of law, stop the violence and end the displacement of civilians from all
communities"
China says the international community "should support the efforts of Myanmar in
safeguarding the stability of its national development" ¬ Bangladesh plans to build more
shelters in the Cox's Bazaar area but also wants to limit their travel to allocated areas.
Myanmar urged displaced people to find refuge in temporary camps set up in Rakhine state. In
November Bangladesh signed a deal with Myanmar to return hundreds of thousands of
Rohingya refugees, but few details have been released.
The UK has pledged £59m in aid to support those fleeing to Bangladesh. UK Prime Minister
Theresa May also said the military action in Rakhine had to stop. The UK has suspended
training courses for the Myanmar military.

12