How the world can end the Rohingya crisis

How the world can end the Rohingya crisis

As the Rohingya crisis continues, Bangladesh faces new challenges, with more refugees seeking shelter from the ongoing civil war spilling across the border. Rohingya in camps in Bangladesh are eager to return home, and the International Court of Justice’s ruling on 22 July 2022, which rejected Myanmar’s preliminary objections, paves the way for eventual accountability for the world’s most persecuted minority. Critics, however, argue that any repatriation plan must uphold the principle of non-refoulement.
Several pathways for Rohingya repatriation have emerged, involving different national and international stakeholders. The New Lines Institute published a groundbreaking report last month exploring alternative pathways for potential Rohingya repatriation.
The most obvious approach is for Bangladesh to work bilaterally with Myanmar, as it has attempted to do since the beginning of the crisis. This approach included the signing of a memorandum of understanding in 2017, which stipulated that the return of displaced people would begin soon and be completed in a “time-bound manner.” However, this approach has suffered from three major problems: the signing of a “settlement” rather than a legally binding agreement, a lack of a clear timeline, and a vague process for repatriation. The flexibility has allowed Myanmar to delay the process.
Moreover, a crucial issue seems to have been ignored during these bilateral meetings: Myanmar’s potential genocide and crimes against humanity. Despite clear evidence of mass atrocities, Bangladesh’s diplomatic gestures, such as donating ambulances to Myanmar, suggested a softer stance. This restrained approach, despite its moral high ground, has limited progress in repatriation efforts.
The involvement of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees has been crucial. The 2017 arrangement included provisions for the UNHCR and other UN agencies to assist in the return and resettlement of the Rohingya. However, no significant progress has been made and the focus of these agencies has shifted more to Bangladesh than to Myanmar.
One critical area is education. The UN has urged Bangladesh to provide education to Rohingya refugees, but the debate has focused on the language of instruction. Balancing the need for communication in the host community’s language with equipping refugees with skills for their future in Myanmar is essential. A dual policy of achieving 100 percent literacy and teaching English could benefit both the Rohingya and the local population.
In 2019, Bangladesh, Myanmar and China formed a tripartite joint working mechanism for the repatriation of the Rohingya. Several meetings have been held, the last in April 2023 in Kunming, where a pilot project for repatriation was discussed. China’s interest in resolving the crisis stems from its investments in both countries and a desire to counterbalance Western influence in Myanmar.
China’s significant investments in Bangladesh and Myanmar are driving the quest for stability. Moreover, resolving the Rohingya crisis could enhance Beijing’s regional and global standing. Despite these interests, the tripartite approach has yet to make substantial progress. The pilot project plans to repatriate more than 1,000 Rohingya refugees, but mixed reactions from Rohingya representatives and a lack of involvement from UNHCR pose challenges.

The West has imposed limited sanctions on Myanmar’s military, but broader economic sanctions are necessary.

Dr. Azeem Ibrahim

In the past five years, significant steps have been taken to address accountability for crimes committed against Rohingya. The International Court of Justice has issued two interim rulings recognizing genocide by the Myanmar military and recognizing the identity of the Rohingya. This was a major legal victory for the Rohingya.
The court hearings on the Rohingya genocide took place in December 2019, with Gambia filing the case against Myanmar. In January 2020, the court had approved the interim measures sought by Gambia. The ruling was unanimous, which Myanmar had not expected. The court’s identification of the group as “Rohingyas” was also critical, countering Myanmar’s attempts to deny their identity. This recognition challenges Myanmar’s longstanding policy of dispossession and dehumanization of the Rohingya people, as enshrined in the 2008 constitution, which links representation to race and thus excludes them.
Myanmar’s labeling of the Rohingya as “Bengalis” or “illegal migrants” has become untenable amid mounting international scrutiny and legal pressure. The International Criminal Court and the US have recognized the genocide, adding further pressure to Myanmar.
Sanctions are a crucial tool for accountability. The West has imposed limited sanctions on Myanmar’s military, but broader economic sanctions are necessary. The strategic use of sanctions can force Myanmar to address human rights abuses and the Rohingya crisis. Companies investing in Myanmar should also be held accountable for complicity in these crimes. Economic pressure, if applied correctly, can push Myanmar to change its policies.
Another possible approach that should be explored further is decoupling, a policy of separating specific activities from others. For example, Japan co-sponsored a UN resolution that favored the Rohingya, signaling a shift in its strategic interests. Recognizing the identity of the Rohingya and inviting their delegations could put pressure on Myanmar to acknowledge and address the crisis.
Economic incentives could also play a role. A so-called mini-Marshall Plan for the Arakan region could provide Myanmar’s military with a legal and profitable alternative to the drug trade, promote stability, and encourage the repatriation of the Rohingya.
The potential for militancy remains a major concern. The 2017 attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army and subsequent military crackdown highlight the volatile situation. Rohingya youth, particularly those in refugee camps, are at risk of being drawn into militancy if the crisis remains unresolved.
These pathways resemble an octopus, with each arm representing a different approach to solving the Rohingya crisis. While some pathways seem more promising, it is too early to determine which will have the most lasting impact. The complexity and sensitivity of the situation require a patient and multifaceted approach.

• Dr. Azeem Ibrahim is Director of Special Initiatives at the Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy in Washington, DC. X: @AzeemIbrahim

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of Arab News.