The worsening plight of Muslim Rohingya communities in Myanmar’s Rakhine State could soon imperil the country’s government, as well as the reputation of its leader, Burmese State Counselor and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi.
The crisis has been escalating since October last year, when Myanmar’s military launched an offensive in which 130 Rohingya were killed, and dozens of their buildings were torched.
At the time, the military’s leaders claimed that the attack was part of an effort to locate unidentified insurgents who were thought to be responsible for the slayings on Oct. 9 of nine policemen at three border posts in the district of Maungdaw.
According to a Human Rights Watch analysis of satellite images, still more Rohingya villages were destroyed over the course of nine days in November, bringing the number of buildings razed to 1,250; meanwhile, 30,000 people have reportedly been displaced.
The UN considers the stateless Rohingya to be among the world’s most persecuted minorities.
Now, other countries in an otherwise stable region are becoming embroiled in the crisis; indeed, countries such as Bangladesh, Thailand, and Indonesia are increasingly feeling the spillover effects, as Rohingya seek asylum within their borders.
The persecution of the Rohingya can no longer be described as merely a domestic problem for Myanmar.
ASEAN has been criticized for approaching the Rohingya issue too cautiously and for failing to recognize that the ongoing conflict could divide the bloc along ethno-religious lines.
The region’s population is 60 percent Muslim, 18 percent Buddhist and 17 percent Christian; continued discrimination against the Rohingya already has become a rallying cry for sympathetic Islamic extremist groups in countries that provide asylum.
This is an especially grave risk for Muslim-majority countries such as Indonesia.
The fleeing Rohingya live in deplorable conditions when they reach host countries, and they have been involved in chronic skirmishes with security forces. Facing constant struggle and ongoing food shortages, the Rohingya are prime targets for terrorist recruiting.
Not surprisingly, Islamic extremist groups have already posted online videos calling for jihad against Myanmar, and Indonesian authorities recently arrested two militants who were allegedly plotting an attack on Myanmar’s embassy in Jakarta.
As the Rohingya crisis deepens, more regional and international extremist groups will undoubtedly use it as a convenient tool to gain sympathy, recruit new members and raise funds.
ASEAN leaders must formulate an effective diplomatic solution to the crisis to prevent it from fueling more extremism in the region and disrupting trade and people’s livelihoods.
The much-heralded “ASEAN Way,” whereby member states adhere to quiet diplomacy and principled non-intervention, served the bloc well on the economic front in its first decades of existence, but as international criticism mounts, the ineffectiveness of a “see no evil, hear no evil” strategy for addressing internal issues should now be obvious.
Malaysia seems to recognize this. At the recent ASEAN foreign ministers’ meeting in Yangon, Myanmar, it called for the coordination of humanitarian aid and an investigation into alleged atrocities committed against Rohingya.
Following the meeting, Myanmar showed willingness to grant humanitarian access and to keep ASEAN members informed.
It is time for ASEAN to heed this call, shifting its mode of operation, so that mature democracies such as Singapore and Malaysia — which rank high in human-development indices — can become responsible global leaders and expand their humanitarian problem-solving capacities.
ASEAN needs to grow into a strong, politically accountable, EU-style community. To do that, it must find peaceful, yet effective ways to mitigate what is now a regional humanitarian crisis.
According to unofficial estimates, there could now be as many as 500,000 Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh alone. Since the latest military intervention, another 20,000 Rohingya have arrived. This puts Bangladesh, which already struggles to provide basic services to its own 170 million citizens, in an extremely difficult position.
Already, Myanmar’s deputy minister of foreign affairs has visited Dhaka for talks, and a three-member team of Myanmar’s Advisory Commission on Rakhine State visited the Rohingya slums in Bangladesh’s coastal area bordering Rakhine State.
ASEAN could help here. Member states such as Singapore enjoy friendly relations with both Myanmar and Bangladesh, and thus could provide a platform for the two countries to come together and arrive at permanent solutions to a decades-old problem.
However, ASEAN must first decide to pull its political weight, and to expend some of its political capital, to bring about a just, long-term settlement.
If it does, it can serve as an honest broker between Myanmar, Bangladesh and, most importantly, representatives of the Rohingya community, who have suffered persecution for long enough.
Syed Munir Khasru is chairman of the Institute for Policy, Advocacy and Governance, an international think tank in Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US