In recent weeks, we have heard the
devastating news of fishing boats filled with Rohingya and Bangladeshi migrants
being abandoned in the middle of the Andaman Sea. These smugglers have since
abandoned their boats in fear of being persecuted by countries such as
Thailand, which has recently embarked on a serious crack-down on human trafficking
activities. This has resulted in a serious humanitarian crisis with these “boat
people”, the name which they are often referred to, experiencing starvation and
with some critically ill. Malaysia and Indonesia have since agreed to accept
7,000 “boat people” onto their shores and to provide medical and humanitarian assistance
for a period of a year. As the
international community struggles to find a solution to this humanitarian and political
crisis, it is important to understand the situation back in Myanmar.
The
Rakhine state in Myanmar, home to a population of about 3.2 million, is a
diverse region, one that has a make-up of a Buddhist majority of 60 percent and
a significant Muslim minority of about 30 percent. The crisis in Rakhine came
into focus in 2012 after waves of violence sparked off between the Rakhines and
the Muslim Rohingyas. A Human Rights
Watch report alleged that these violence were the result of a collusion between
Buddhist monks, state officials, security forces aimed at terrorizing and "forcibly relocating" the Rohingya. The Rohingyas
were historically not viewed as rightful citizens of Myanmar by the government
despite many having lived in Myanmar for generations. They are often viewed as
illegal interlopers from neighboring Bangladesh and are not recognized as an
indigenous ethnicity of Myanmar. This
was further amplified by a citizenship law in 1982, which links citizenship
with race, which led to these Rohingyas being effectively stripped of their citizenship.
They are now held up in camps with poor
living conditions and are continually being persecuted. Many Rohingyas,
exasperated with their situation, have decided to take matters into their own
hands and escape to neighboring Muslim-majority countries such as Malaysia and
Indonesia which have showed sympathy to Rohingyas in the past.
Much
talk has been going around in Singapore with regards to whether Singapore
should and could take in these “boat people” and to provide a shelter for them,
similar to what Malaysia and Indonesia have done. It is of course easy to stand
on moral high ground and to say that we as a society need to show compassion
and accept these “boat people” and provide the necessary aid. But we too need
to consider the practical aspect of housing these “boat people”: Where are we
going to house them? How long are we going to house them? Will they be
restricted to a confined space? What if there is no long-term solution for
these Rohingyas? There is simply too much uncertainty with regards to these “boat
people” for Singapore to take them in. Singapore did take in Vietnamese
refugees back in 1978 with the condition that they will only be here for 90
days with the guarantee that they will be taken in by another country after
that. However, the circumstances with these “boat people” is different, with no
clear solution in sight, these “boat people” may end up staying here for years.
Are we going to integrate them into the Singapore society then? Would it be
politically and socially feasible? If Singapore were to accept these “boat
people”, it may set the precedence of what is tolerable and make Singapore a
hot-spot for refugee and human-trafficking activities. Don’t get me wrong, I am all for Singapore
providing aid as a transition location if a clear diplomatic solution is in
sight, but given the current situation, it is just not feasible.
Now
that Malaysia and Indonesia has agreed to hold these Rohingyas temporarily for
a year, time must not be wasted to find a political solution to this crisis. Given
the lack of will on the Myanmar government to look out for the welfare of these
Rohingyas in its policies and actions, I believe that international agencies and
countries have a role to play in pressurizing the government to do what is
right. In the short-term, more should be done to ensure that no more Rohingyas
leave the Myanmar border by boat as they risk their lives and risk a greater
humanitarian dilemma for countries that are already stretching their resources
to take in the 7,000 refugees. Concurrently, the Myanmar government must be
pressured to open up the Rohingya living space to international aid workers to
enter to provide much needed humanitarian aid to the people. Independent
observers must also be allowed in to ensure that authorities do not support and
promote sectarian violence. In addition, the breakdown of the law and the
justice system must be restored. Those who organize and participate in hate
crimes and violence must be investigated and brought to justice; doing so will
not only bring these people to justice but also reinstate the respect for the
law and prevent further violence. These are short term measures to ensure the
basic rights of these Rohingyas are guaranteed while a more complicated long
term solution is discussed.
The
conflict arose from two hard-line groups who are insistent on their respective
positions: The Myanmar government who do not recognize these Rohingyas as
rightful citizens of Myanmar and the Rohingyas who identify themselves as Burmese.
The draft plan which the Myanmar government proposed was merely an attempt to appease
the international community but it is clearly discriminatory in nature. Firstly,
the draft plan requires Rohingyas to provide documentation proof that their
families were in Myanmar before Myanmar’s declared independence. This is simply
not possible because most families do not have such documentation or have lost
it over the years of violence. Secondly, the panel who decides whether one gets
a Myanmar citizenship contains representatives from the Rakhines community,
essentially giving veto rights to the Rakhines over who gets accepted. And
lastly, but most importantly, the state forces these Rohingyas to be classified
as “Bengalis”, a move which signifies that they are foreigners first. The
citizenship being offered is also a “naturalized” citizenship – a “second-class”
citizenship which carries fewer rights and could be stripped at any time. These
uncertainties can be used against the Rohingyas by the state and thus such a
citizenship is not desired by the Rohingyas.
At the
heart of it, the Rohingyas just want to be recognized as citizens of Myanmar
and given the same rights and opportunities as the rest of the Burmese and they
see their Rohingya identify as central to their argument; since if they were
accepted as an indigenous group, they would qualify for full citizenship by
birth. However, the 1982 law has linked citizenship to with race which discriminates
the Rohingyas. To move ahead, a compromise must be made. Muslim leaders may
consider dropping their insistence on being identified as “Rohingya” if there
is a clear and sure path to citizenship. In other words, they can campaign to
be offered citizenship under another identity marker that would not imply indigenous
status and thus would be offered citizenship by descent rather than birth. They
could be identified by the name “Rakhine Muslims” or “Myanmar Muslims”. Of course, for this to work, the government
must be willing to accept these Rohingya to be part of Myanmar, if not no
reclassification will work.
This is
a problem that the international community has chosen to turn a blind eye on
for too long, it has only became a topic of discussion recently because of the huge humanitarian crisis and the implications for surrounding neighbors. Political
pressure on the Myanmar government cannot be softened even after these refugees
are housed in Malaysia and Indonesia. Only sustained pressure and sanctions
against the Myanmar government can force it to have the will to resolve this
long standing problem. Without sustained effort and compromise from the
Rohingyas and the Myanmar government along with international intervention, the
scene of large masses of “boat people” stranded in the middle of the sea will
continue to resurface.
--THE END--