THE ROHINGYA CRISIS A TEST FOR BANGLADESH–MYANMAR RELATIONS

INTRODUCTION
1. The Rohingya refugee crisis is a contentious issue that has strained Myanmar-
Bangladesh relations since the late 1970s. The Rohingya crisis emanated from
the military junta's widespread violations of human rights in Myanmar against the
Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine. Rendered stateless, the Rohingyas fled to
Bangladesh and other neighboring countries to take refuge. Years of negotiation
have failed to resolve the Rohingya refugee crisis.

2. Recent Violence against the Rohingya in Myanmar’s north-western Rakhine state

has generated a massive influx of refugees to Bangladesh that will test bilateral
relations. Between August and November 2017, the Myanmar military’s
‘clearance operations’ forced more than 622,000 Rohingya to cross the border
into neighbouring Bangladesh.

3.

AIM
4

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
4. The Bangladesh government has faced the Rohingya crisis since Bangladesh’s
independence. In the 1970s, an anti-insurgency campaign of Myanmar’s then
military government in Rakhine state saw widespread violations of human rights
and brutal acts against the Muslim-minority Rohingya. Nearly 300,000 Rohingyas
were forced to cross the border at that time. During 1991–92, a second wave of
over 250,000 Rohingya fled to Bangladesh to escape the ongoing military
crackdown. Since the 1970s, more than one million Rohingya have taken refuge
in Bangladesh.

5. The influx of refugees has been continuous, even as relations between

Bangladesh and Myanmar have undergone frequent ups and downs. The largest
influx of Rohingya into Bangladesh took place in 1990–91. The UNHCR
subsequently facilitated a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between
Bangladesh and Myanmar in April 1992 under which Myanmar agreed to the
return of those Rohingya refugees who could prove residency in Myanmar prior
 to their departure for Bangladesh. But the UNHCR withdrew from the repatriation
process in December 1992 due to concerns over the forceful repatriation of some
Rohingya refugees, which jeopardised the broader repatriation framework.

6. Thanks to strategic and business interests, a number of countries have extended

their support to the Myanmar government remaining oblivious to the
humanitarian crisis and the long history of persecution of Rohingyas. This ethnic
minority group, most of whom are Muslims, had been stateless through the 1982
Citizenship Act and was excluded from the 2015 national census. Equally
important to note is the rise of extremist Buddhist nationalist groups, which have
relentlessly campaigned against Muslims; and the mainstream politicians' policy
of appeasement of these extremist groups has made the situation worse. The
Commission on Rakhine State, appointed by the Myanmar Government and the
Annan Center last year, which submitted its report last month, warned of possible
radicalisation sans a political solution and developmental intervention helping the
Rohingyas. International Crisis Group, in a report last December, indicated that a
new insurgency is in the making. Yet the international community remained silent
and allowed the situation to deteriorate.

FEW EXTRA KNOWLEDGES

The deafening silence of the international community on the plight of Rohingyas is

matched with the unqualified support of China to Myanmar, a close ally for decades.
Myanmar plays a key role in China's planned 'One Belt One Road' initiatives with
billions of dollars of investments in energy and infrastructure projects. Russia has
remained a steadfast supporter of the regime. In December last year, both China and
Russia vetoed the UN Security Council motion to censure Myanmar. India, in a bid to
weaken Chinese influence in the region, has warmed up to Myanmar. In the wake of the
present crisis, the Indian prime minister has extended unequivocal support to the
Myanmar government while making an official trip last week, and the Indian government
has threatened to deport 40,000 Rohingya refugees from the country. Despite an
embargo on weapons sale to Myanmar, Israel has supplied weapons to the country. In
February this year, Pakistan signed a deal to supply F-16 jets to Myanmar. The United
States, which began a new era of engagement with Myanmar when the country moved
towards democracy in 2014, is now embroiled in a row with North Korea and is paying
little attention elsewhere. A muted reaction came in on Thursday when it condemned
the violence and urged to allow humanitarian access to Rakhine State.

This is just the tip of the iceberg of the deep defence, strategic and business
relationships between Myanmar and regional and global powers. These countries have
vested interests in supporting the Myanmar government, making it an uphill task for
Bangladesh to convince the international community for a concerted action against
Myanmar.

However, European countries have taken note of the deteriorating situation. They were
vocal critics of Myanmar at the UN Human Rights Council. On Thursday, the EU
condemned the ongoing violence. Previously, Myanmar blocked a UN fact-finding
mission. But the UN Secretary-General, in a rare move, sent a letter to the UN Security
Council requesting urgent action to address the situation.

A few Muslim-majority countries, especially Turkey, Indonesia and Malaysia, not only
expressed serious concerns but also tried to rally support. Turkey holds the Presidency
of the OIC and Recep Tayyip Erdogan is trying to use the office to bolster his standing
among Muslim-majority countries. As Turkey's own human rights record is very poor,
one understands that the Turkish initiative is more a political maneuvering than a
humanitarian gesture.

These do not provide an optimistic picture regarding a possible serious reprimand of or

pressure on Myanmar. Despite the gloomy picture it is incumbent on Bangladesh to
take the lead as the most affected country. The national interest of the country demands
robust action. It cannot look at other countries and follow in their footsteps. Now that it
has taken the first step, the Foreign Ministry of Bangladesh should consider appointing
a special envoy on Rohingya and the refugee issue with the support of the highest
political office. It will send the message that the country has prioritised the crisis and
impart a sense of urgency among the international community.

UN AND OTHER ORG ACTION

7. The United States has called the treatment of the Rohingya ‘ethnic cleansing’
and threatened sanction against those responsible. Chinese Foreign Minister
Wang Yi, while visiting Dhaka in November 2017, proposed a three-phase plan
for resolving the Rohingya crisis, starting with a ceasefire followed by bilateral
dialogue.
 8. At an Asia–Europe Meeting summit on 13–14 November 2017, the foreign
ministers of member countries called for an immediate cessation of hostilities,
halting of refugee outflow and early return of the displaced Rohingya from
Bangladesh. They also called for the implementation of recommendations from
the Advisory Committee on Rakhine State, which was a joint initiative between
the Myanmar government and the Kofi Annan Foundation.
BANGLADESH ACTION
9. While it is encouraging to know that Bangladesh has taken diplomatic initiatives
to bring the ongoing Rohingya refugee crisis to the international fora, the
question is whether it has devised a strategy to go forward. Press reports inform
us that the Bangladesh foreign ministry has reached out to world powers such as
Germany, China and Russia and contacted several multilateral bodies such as
the United Nations, European Union, ASEAN and OIC for their help in
addressing the humanitarian crisis that has befallen the Rohingya refugees who
have crossed the border into Bangladesh in the past two weeks. These steps,
along with a concrete proposal for establishing a “safe zone” within Myanmar by
the UN for persecuted Rohingyas, are a step in the right direction, although a bit
late.
PRESENT SITUATION
10. Amid this mounting pressure, Myanmar State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi
agreed to sign a MOU on 23 November 2017 with Bangladesh based on the
1992 agreement which would enable the two countries to start repatriating the
verified Rohingya in Bangladesh. But Bangladesh signed the MOU without
specifying deadlines for the initiation and completion of repatriation, hoping that
the forcibly displaced Rohingya would start returning to their homeland within two
months.

11. Still, there is some cause for optimism that Bangladesh–Myanmar relations are
ripe for cooperation to solve the Rohingya crisis. Myanmar has partially
democratised and peacefully settled maritime disputes with Bangladesh through
the demarcation of maritime boundaries.

12. In November 2017, Myanmar’s Minister for the Office of the State Counsellor, U
Kyaw Tint Swe, visited Bangladesh. He exchanged with Mahmood Ali,
Bangladesh’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, the long-awaited ‘instrument of
ratification’ of a 1998 agreement demarcating the land north of the Naf River that
separates the two countries. Myanmar and Bangladesh also formed a Joint
Working Group on 20 December 2017 to oversee the repatriation of the
Rohingya.
13. But the Rohingya are stateless and not protected by any government. Resolving
the Rohingya crisis will require coordinated local, regional and international
diplomacy to urge the Myanmar government to cease its atrocities against
minorities.
 14. Uncertainties over the statelessness of the Rohingya mean the international
community has not seriously considered humanitarian intervention. International
relief agencies such as the UNHCR, World Food Programme and various NGOs
are involved in the provision of aid to Rohingya refugees.

15. The sudden influx of so many refugees has created a major humanitarian
emergency and raises security concerns. There’s also a less-well-understood
effect: The Rohingya refugee crisis is shaking Bangladesh’s body politic to the
core, and in ways that may hasten the country’s ongoing slide toward
authoritarianism.

THE PLAN TO REPATRIATE ROHINGYA REFUGEES LEADS TO FEARS OF NEW

DANGERS

16. protecting returning refugees will not be possible without significant monitoring
efforts by international observers, Human Rights Watch said. The government
has largely rejected international recommendations to allow free access for aid
agencies, the media, and rights observers, only allowing a few humanitarian
groups to deliver aid in northern Rakhine State and denying access to
independent journalists and rights monitors

17. Bangladesh is bound by customary international law’s prohibition on refoulement

not to forcibly return anyone to a place where they would face persecution,
torture, ill-treatment, or death. Governments cannot pressure individuals to return
to a country where they face serious risk of harm.

18. Human Rights Watch urged Burma and Bangladesh to suspend and renegotiate
the repatriation agreement because of numerous flaws that endanger refugees’
lives; the impossible timetable for voluntary, safe, and sustainable returns; and
the failure to involve the UN refugee agency.
19. “Burma has largely refused to allow international involvement in addressing the
Rohingya crisis,” Adams said. “Instead of underwriting forced returns, donors
should demand that Burma ensures international participation in any return plan.”

CONCLUSION
But the Rohingya crisis is fundamentally a human security issue (though encompassing
non-traditional security concerns). The UN, ASEAN, Organisation of Islamic
Cooperation and other key players such as the United States, China, India and Russia
must — in keeping with their own responsibility to protect — place pressure on
Myanmar’s government to stop these mass atrocities.
The diplomatic initiative is a welcome development, but to achieve a real result it must
be done with great urgency and with a clear strategy, keeping in mind that no one will
do the bidding for Bangladesh.