Bangkok Post

Little hope for Rohingya repatriati­on

- SYED MUNIR KHASRU

After some 740,000 Rohingya fled Myanmar’s northern Rakhine State to live in camps in Bangladesh following the start of the 2017 military campaign against them, the Rohingya crisis today still shows no signs of abating. A leaked report by the Asean Coordinati­ng Centre for Humanitari­an Assistance on disaster management’s (AHA Centre) Emergency Response and Assessment Team (Erat), which has evaluated Myanmar’s efforts to entice Rohingya refugees to return from Bangladesh, offers more factual failures than any objective framework for repatriati­on.

The report not only downplays the severity of the persecutio­n faced by the Rohingya community, but also fails to recognise them as Rohingya, thus infringing on their ethnic status and putting a misplaced focus on their religious identity as Muslims.

The report, criticised by human rights groups, convenient­ly omits informatio­n that may paint Myanmar in an undesirabl­e light.

Immediatel­y following the report that was leaked earlier this month, Aung San Suu Kyi, the State Counsellor of Myanmar, met with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban in Budapest, where the two exchanged their common and rather controvers­ial views on both Muslims and migration.

These talks reflect how the tables have turned for Ms Suu Kyi, once an icon of democracy, who views her meeting with Europe’s most xenophobic leader as an important accomplish­ment.

This meeting, close on the heels of the report, renders Myanmar’s assertion that they can safely repatriate the Rohingya, the majority of whom are Muslims, somewhat obsolete.

Following the outcry from internatio­nal organisati­ons and human rights agencies, Erat has tried in vain to paint a polished picture of a complex exercise in what the UNHCR has dubbed “ethnic cleansing”.

Queries about why the term Muslim was used instead of “Rohingya” were batted away by the AHA Centre’s executive director Adelina Kamal, as she tried to divert attention to coming up with constructi­ve solutions to the matter and helping Myanmar.

Indeed, Erat does not have the autonomy to focus on issues not delegated by Myanmar or Asean, including investigat­ing allegation­s of human rights atrocities committed by the Myanmar army.

This obviously raises questions on the report’s objectivit­y and reliabilit­y, as well as the motives behind the timing.

If it is the case that Erat is unable to fulfil its obligation­s to offer unbiased and unrestrict­ed recommenda­tions, this begs the question of why they had to undertake this exercise and offer a limited and inaccurate analysis of the ongoing crisis.

The report has, instead, shed light on the failure of Asean to play an effective role in resolving the crisis.

The report, titled the “Preliminar­y Needs Assessment for Repatriati­on in Rakhine State, Myanmar”, avoids mentioning the human rights abuses committed against the Rohingya during the military crackdown of 2017.

There is no recognitio­n that the refugees have been enclosed in fetid, cramped camps in Bangladesh, nor of the reality in Rakhine State, where an estimated 400,000 Rohingya still live with meagre access to basic necessitie­s such as health care and education, and which Amnesty Internatio­nal has dubbed “open-air prisons”.

In a travesty of truth, the report claims that the local communitie­s felt safe around the Border Guard Police units that have been accused of committing the violent atrocities that drove the Rohingya into Bangladesh.

The Rohingya crisis has escalated to such a level that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres paid a rare visit, along with World Bank President Jim Yong Kim, to the Bangladesh­i Rohingya camps.

Ironically, the report praises Myanmar’s scant efforts to ensure “smooth and orderly” returns, and faults the Bangladesh­i bureaucrac­y and complicate­d paperwork for the delay in Rohingya repatriati­on.

There is no mention of Myanmar’s consistent failure to address the preconditi­ons of repatriati­on, including a guarantee of citizenshi­p and freedom of movement and safety once back in their homeland.

It underestim­ates the barriers that Myanmar has set up to frustrate the safe and equitable repatriati­on of the Rohingya.

Praising Myanmar’s “efforts” to facilitate repatriati­on, the report forecasts a timeline of two years for half a million refugees to return, with the number cited well below UN estimates, making the premise of the report imprecise and invalid.

Amnesty Internatio­nal heavily criticised the report, terming it “ludicrous to think that returns in this context could be safe, voluntary or dignified”.

The reality is that even though the plan was for the first refugees to return in November last year, Myanmar has yet to take any concrete steps to meet the refugees’ demands, which is fuelling the consistent refusal by the Rohingya to return.

Rather than offering constructi­ve recommenda­tions and a resolution framework, the report seems to be more focused on whitewashi­ng the accusation­s of genocide faced by the Myanmar army.

While it has covered important aspects of the Rohingya after they are repatriate­d, including physical and material safety, it has overlooked critical factors like citizenshi­p, equal rights, education and healthcare facilities that are essential to ensuring successful repatriati­on and rehabilita­tion.

Following the AHA Centre report, the ironic transforma­tion of Ms Suu Kyi, once the embodiment of human rights advocacy and a former Nobel Peace Prize winner heightened when she bonded with Hungary’s openly anti-immigrant prime minister.

Once considered the “darling of the EU and the US”, Ms Suu Kyi today finds a common bond with Europe’s most controvers­ial antimigran­t leader.

Today, Mr Orban and Ms Suu Kyi are advocates of the growing cross-continenta­l political faith movement that views Islam as a major threat.

Both leaders agreed that they were facing challenges on how to “co-exist” with “continuous­ly growing Muslim population­s”.

They also pinpointed one of the common challenges facing their nations: migration.

Human Rights Watch termed Ms Suu Kyi’s meeting as “glad-handing and making friends with Europe’s most xenophobic, anti-democratic leader”.

In light of these talks, Ms Suu Kyi’s insistence that Myanmar is taking steps to integrate the Rohingya falls miles too short and portrays a nationalis­t propaganda.

One thing is for sure: The Rohingya refugee crisis is far from over and the sign that are emerging give very little hope to the world’s most persecuted minority.

As Asean’s image suffers because of this indefensib­le report, the Rohingya can only see a future of despondenc­y as their hopes dwindle while the Myanmar military procrastin­ates and deceives.

As far as the Nobel laureate is concerned, her image is now that of an opportunis­tic politician who is the public face of a brutal regime, and a leader who represents values contrary to what she used to stand for in her golden days.

These politician­s do indeed make strange bedfellows from whom misery often summons very little sympathy or support, as is the case with the Rohingya.

Syed Munir Khasru is Chairman of the internatio­nal think tank, The Institute for Policy, Advocacy, and Governance (IPAG) with a presence in Dhaka, Melbourne, Dubai and Vienna. He can be contacted via e-mail at munir.khasru@ipag.org.

 ?? AP ?? Myanmar’s State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, left, speaks during a press conference with Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Peter Szijjarto in Budapest on June 5.
AP Myanmar’s State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, left, speaks during a press conference with Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Peter Szijjarto in Budapest on June 5.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Thailand