What's new

Myanmar took advantage of Bangladesh Weakness

Well the case is clearly show BD gov. is spineless when the task of defending sovereignty is coming to them. So many breach and pushover from Myanmar side not even a single posturing acts came from Dhaka.

1. They mining the border
2. They push hundreds thousands their people towards BD, the ethnic with close relation toward BD
3. They flying the copter, the armed ones in BD sky to hunt down the refugees and rebels. Not just one or two but dozens times
4. They mobilized full divisions toward the border area

In Another countries thats clearly acts warrant War as the only answer
You are correct on govt spineless part. It has mostly to do with our female pm. Under no circumstances she will allow a war.
You probably seen her visit to Rohingya refugee and what she said. "MM should had handle the situation patiently. They should not had allowed their security forces to target common civilian" - Hasina.

Why would you think she will think differently for herself. Our immediate goal is to create enough international support for Rohingya. A war with mm will not just be limited to border. There are other calculation to it.
 
.
The Rohingya genocide and ambivalent Bangladesh – I
by Taj Hashmi | Published: 00:05, Sep 17,2017 | Updated: 23:33, Sep 16,2017
24197_197.jpg

The photo taken on September 15 shows Rohingyas from Myanmar gathering around a truck delivering clothes in Ukhia, Cox’s Bazar. — Agence France-Presse/Munir Uz Zaman

‘AMBIVALENCE’ is a state of having simultaneous conflicting beliefs and opinions towards people, objects, events, and concepts. It is the most appropriate expression to portray the state of Bangladeshi indecisiveness toward the ongoing genocide of Rohingyas in Arakan.

Both the people and their government in Bangladesh seem to be unenthused to the sufferings of Rohingyas just across the Naf River. While Bangladeshis who have been demonstrating on streets against the Rohingya genocide have been predominantly devout Muslims and their leaders (mostly madrasa teachers and imams); ‘secular’ Bangladeshis and their leaders have at best been lukewarm towards the state-sponsored persecution of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar.

And the ruling Awami League has ensured that the opposition, especially the Bangladesh Nationalist Party — its arch rival and nemesis — be not allowed to distribute any relief materials among Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh. Recently, the partisan police prohibited a convoy of 22 trucks from entering Teknaf, which were carrying relief goods for refugees, on behalf of the BNP.

Apparently, there has been some positive response from the Government of Bangladesh toward the ‘Rohingya Crisis’, which is solely about the influx of Rohingya refugees into Bangladesh, and their eventual return to Myanmar. It hardly addresses the genocide issue at all. It is a ‘positive response’ indeed, as soon after the eruption of violence in Myanmar on 25th August, the GOB asked the BGB (its border security personnel) not to allow any refugees into Bangladesh from across the border; and prime minister Sheikh Hasina also ensured the Myanmar authorities of joint-operations against Rohingya ‘terrorists’, by Bangladesh and Myanmar security forces, together.

Some external factors seem to be the main catalysts in the Bangladesh government’s change of heart in this regard. Turkish president Erdogan’s recent bold condemnation of the Myanmar regime for the mass killing, and his sending the first lady and his foreign minister to Bangladesh as a gesture of solidarity with the Rohingya people might have embarrassed the Bangladesh government. Last but not least, chief minister Mamata Banerjee and people in neighbouring state of Paschim Banga in India seem to be much more vocal against the Myanmar regime than the government and people of Bangladesh.

In this backdrop, let us look at the problem in historical and contemporary perspectives. Shockingly, the influx of around four hundred thousand Rohingya refugees into Bangladesh (as of mid-September) seems to be the bigger issue for its people and government than the genocide per se.
‘Genocide’ is the right word to describe the ongoing mass killing, rape, and expropriation of Rohingyas in Myanmar. As Polish lawyer Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959) first used the expression in 1943 in his book, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Laws of Occupation - Analysis of Government - Proposals for Redress to define the mass killings, rapes, torture, extortions, and marginalisation of Jews and others in Axis-occupied Europe in the 1930s and 1940s, I think ‘genocide’ appropriately explains the off and on persecution, killing, and expropriation of Rohingya minority in Myanmar, since 1948.
According to Professor David Simon, director of Genocide Studies programme at Yale University: ‘genocide is underway against the Rohingya of Myanmar… As several recent reports document, in recent months, security forces, allied militias, civil society organizations, and citizens have committed atrocities ranging from pillaging, looting, and forced displacement to rape, torture, and murder against the Rohingya’ (Yale Macmillan Centre, ‘Commentary – Lessons of the Rohingya genocide’, January 17, 2017).

Although we have learnt from former UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon that the Rohingyas belong to the ‘single biggest stateless community in the world’, we have no idea about the total number of Rohingyas in the world. We know around two million Rohingyas have fled Myanmar since 1978, but we have no clues about the total population of these people who are still in Myanmar. Our guestimate of ‘two to three million’ may be attributed to the deliberate exclusion of the Rohingyas from census operations by successive autocratic regimes in Myanmar, since 1962. We only come across the most racist, prejudicial observations by Myanmar authorities on the ‘exceedingly high’ birth-rate among the Rohingyas in Arakan. Among others, two Nobel Peace Laureates, Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama also think the Suu Kyi regime of Myanmar is genocidal. The latter even believes, had Buddha been alive today, he would have sided with the Rohingyas.

However, conspiracy theories about the ‘Rohingya Crisis’ abound. Not only the military-backed Suu Kyi regime is in a state of denial about committing any genocide against the Rohingyas, but some international ‘experts’ even suggest that the victims are not Rohingyas but Bangladeshi intruders; and that the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army is the main destabilising factor in Arakan.

While one Russian analyst argues that George Soros and mega US business are terrorising the Rohingyas with the help of Myanmar’s security forces with Suu Kyi’s approval, just to jeopardise Chinese investments in Myanmar, China is still defending the Myanmar regime. Renowned Myanmar expert Lex Rieffel is very enlightening in this regard: ‘I know how horrible the situation is. I have been to Rakhine state and have seen the Rohingya confined to a refugee camp on the outskirts of the state capital of Sittwe…the Rohingya have been formally ‘stateless’ for more than 20 years, thus depriving them of access to employment, education, health services, and freedom to move within the country’ (Lex Rieffel, ‘There’s no simple solution to the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar’, Brookings Brief, Sept 13, 2017).

Myanmar’s majority Burman Buddhists have been persecuting the Rohingyas since their annexation of Arakan in 1784. Some scholars estimate as high as 50 per cent of Chittagonians are descendants of Rohingya refugees/settlers in greater Chittagong, 35,000 Rohingyas are said to have fled to Chittagong in 1784 alone. More than 50 per cent of the entire Rohingya population in Arakan is now living as refugees or illegal settlers in various countries. One may find an objective account of the history of the Rohingyas — especially the way they have been victimised by the majority Buddhist politicians, security forces, and people during the pre- and post-colonial periods — in Riccardo Marzoli’s scholarly work (‘The Protection of Human Rights of Rohingya in Myanmar: The Role of the International Community’, Master’s Thesis, LUISS University, Rome 2015).

Unfortunately, no civil and military government in Bangladesh has yet behaved with some dignity and courage to warn their Myanmar counterpart to behave, to respect international law and human rights of minorities. From their insensitive reaction to the mass killing of Rohingyas, and pushing thousands of them as refugees into Bangladesh, by Myanmar, it appears that Bangladeshis have simply forgotten the history of their own Liberation War. They must not forget that but for India’s generous help — especially, its sheltering ten million Bengali refugees during the War — Bangladesh would not have come into being only after a nine-month-long armed struggle in 1971. Both the successive BNP and Awami League governments since 1978 have tried to address the problem Rohingya refugees through UN and human rights organisations. While the BNP Government successfully resolved the Rohingya refugee problem in 1978, all governments afterward have miserably failed to resolve the problem, re-emerged again since 1991. As there are no signs of any remission in the intensity of organised attacks and killing of Rohingyas in Arakan, Bangladesh might end up getting more than a million refugees before the end of 2017 (BBC World News, Sept 2-4, 2017).

Dr. Kamal Siddiqui, a retired principal secretary to the prime minister of Bangladesh, in a personal communication to this writer wrote on August 31, 2017 on the GOB’s lukewarm support for the Rohingyas:

Has Bangladesh the moral right to behave like this? In 1971, when it was facing genocide from Pakistanis, did not India help Bangladesh with shelter, arms and training? I am afraid both AL and BNP have similar policy towards the Rohingyas. I was in PM’s Office in 1992-93 when Rohingyas came in large numbers to Bangladesh…. I see the same indecent behaviour now. I hope Turkey, Iran, Qatar, Malaysia and Indonesia will get together and do something to help the beleaguered Rohingyas and put Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan and Bangladesh to shame.

Bangladesh government since the overflow of Rohingya refugees at its ‘sealed’ border with Myanmar has recently opened its border, allowing the refugees in. However, the GOB has virtually no Rohingya policy for the last eight years. Even after the resurgence of mass killing of Rohingyas had begun on August 25, the GOB proposed joint-military operations with Myanmar against ‘Rohingya militants fighting in Rakhine state’ (‘Bangladesh offers Myanmar military aid against Rohingya rebels’ AFP/Arab News, 29 August 2017). This stand was not that different from the Modi Government’s latest decision to deport all Rohingyas from India (Reuters, August 14, 2017). I am afraid, if Bangladesh does not become proactive in addressing the Rohingya Crisis, and instead starts joint military operations against Rohingya insurgents along with Myanmar, the ARSA, which is fast turning into a revolutionary/terrorist-insurgent outfit in Arakan and elsewhere in Myanmar, will backfire and eventually, destabilise Bangladesh as well.

Then again, the GOB’s lack of any sense of direction in its foreign policy is well-reflected in its appeal to Washington to ‘put pressure on Myanmar’ to stop the inflows of refugees into Bangladesh. PM Hasina ‘made the appeal when US Acting Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Alice Wells met her at her office’ (Daily Star, August 31, 2017). At the end of the day, it appears that for the GOB, and most Bangladeshis in general, the ‘Rohingya Crisis’ is all about the influx of unwanted refugees into Bangladesh! Nothing more,
nothing less!
To be continued
Dr Taj Hashmi teaches security studies at Austin Peay State University in the US. He is the author of several books, including his latest, Global Jihad and America: The Hundred-Year War Beyond Iraq and Afghanistan (Sage, 2014).
http://www.newagebd.net/article/24197/the-rohingya-genocide-and-ambivalent-bangladesh-i
 
.
"In the face of Burma's incursion in 2000, more than 6 hundred Burma's Burmese soldiers were killed in the lasting 3-day continuous offensive of 2500 soldiers led by BDR chief General Fazlur Rahman"

@Aung Zaya ;
@Nilgiri

See what BD army is capable of when unleased on the rag-tag Myanmarese one.
A lot of generals in the BD army are waiting to carry out the next operation against Myanmar.
ha ha... where did you read this fan fiction?
have you actually been to bd, ever? do you have any bangladeshi friend/colleague? How can somebody be this out of touch with reality.

You are correct on govt spineless part. It has mostly to do with our female pm. Under no circumstances she will allow a war.
You probably seen her visit to Rohingya refugee and what she said. "MM should had handle the situation patiently. They should not had allowed their security forces to target common civilian" - Hasina.

Why would you think she will think differently for herself. Our immediate goal is to create enough international support for Rohingya. A war with mm will not just be limited to border. There are other calculation to it.
nothing to do with being female... its mindset..
the only indian prime minister who enthusiastically used arms was a female... she went around the world drumming support for war while preparing her armed forces. she also used army against sikh terrorists, most Indian PM would have gone for compromise. she also created LTTE terrorists... basically created fire everywhere lol.
 
.
nothing to do with being female... its mindset..
the only indian prime minister who enthusiastically used arms was a female... she went around the world drumming support for war while preparing her armed forces. she also used army against sikh terrorists, most Indian PM would have gone for compromise. she also created LTTE terrorists... basically created fire everywhere lol.
She was not female.
 
.
Avicenna,

Bengalis are great at fighting with words and keyboards, not with real weapons. In 1970-71, 93K Pak soldiers kept whole of BD (60 million people) under control. In 1946 a few thousand Sikhs and Gorkhas snatched Kolkata from Bengali Muslims who had earlier made mincemeat of Bengali Hindu bhadraloks.

Regards
Correct it,it was 45000 regular and 10000 Supporters,rest 93000 POW number includes all civilians from WP who were in EP at the time of surrendering, including Government servants etc.
 
.
Bangla bhai/Bluesky,

You guys are yourselves admitting that Rohingyas wanted to break away from Burma and join East Pak, so can we blame Burma for being suspicious of Rohingyas?

Regards
Ask your father, Burma, to give back the Rohingya citizenship and all other facilities. No one will ever ask for an independent Arakan. Rohingyas are not boot-licking Indians. They need their own country if they are not recogized as the Burmese citizens.
 
.
Bluesky,

Rohingyas are not boot-licking Indians. They need their own country if they are not recognized as the Burmese citizens.

Good idea. You could carve out a homeland for them in the Cox Bazar district.

Regards
 
. .
In 1978, when the Rohingya problem arose, martyred President Ziaur Rahman sent first Brigade soldiers to the border. As a result, the Burmese regime, Nay Win, feared and judged in the United Nations. Afterwards, President Zia sent Rohingya back to the United Nations mediation agreement. In the face of Burma's incursion in 2000, more than 6 hundred Burma's Burmese soldiers were killed in the lasting 3-day continuous offensive of 2500 soldiers led by BDR chief General Fazlur Rahman. After teaching the Burmese army that there was a lot of peace.
President Ayub Khan added the 1st milestone by expelling the Burmese Army from the north bank of Naf Dariya in 1962. Next came other military Presidents or generals of BD who dealt with Burma.

Now, this woman PM of BD is an indecisive type of panicky and mentally ill person who cannot say 'No' to MM. Had there been Sk. Mujib or Ziaur Rahman, I believe, the Junta in Burma would have thought twice before expelling its own Muslim citizens to BD.
 
. .
Punjabi Sikh wanted to break away from India and wanted to form independent Khalistan.So India should start genocide campaign against Sikh people?

Yes, Separatists against state should be nibbled in bud

- India did the same with Khalistan terrorists
- India is doing the same in Kashmir
- Pakistan is doing the same in Balochistan
- China is doing the same in Xinjiang
- Bangladesh will do the same in Chittagong Buddhist want to carve out a separate country

"In the face of Burma's incursion in 2000, more than 6 hundred Burma's Burmese soldiers were killed in the lasting 3-day continuous offensive of 2500 soldiers led by BDR chief General Fazlur Rahman"

@Aung Zaya ;
@Nilgiri

See what BD army is capable of when unleased on the rag-tag Myanmarese one.
A lot of generals in the BD army are waiting to carry out the next operation against Myanmar.

Can you quote a source for your claim
 
.
Yes, Separatists against state should be nibbled in bud

- India did the same with Khalistan terrorists
- India is doing the same in Kashmir
- Pakistan is doing the same in Balochistan
- China is doing the same in Xinjiang
- Bangladesh will do the same in Chittagong Buddhist want to carve out a separate country
Can you quote a source for your claim

when the inhabitants of a region are hated to the core and were not allowed to go to other part of the country then the area itself becomes a separate country. it is burmas destiny, and the game will be played accordingly. Nobody asked a separate country but wanted dignity and equality from burmese government. If they cant then its their fault.

 
Last edited:
.
President Ayub Khan added the 1st milestone by expelling the Burmese Army from the north bank of Naf Dariya in 1962. Next came other military Presidents or generals of BD who dealt with Burma.

Now, this woman PM of BD is an indecisive type of panicky and mentally ill person who cannot say 'No' to MM. Had there been Sk. Mujib or Ziaur Rahman, I believe, the Junta in Burma would have thought twice before expelling its own Muslim citizens to BD.
Currently there is an international tribunal going on in Malaysia to assess the burmese crime against Rohingya.Among the judges, there is also a burmese judge.He said that, in 1978 Rohingya crisis, Ziaur Rahman threatened the burmese junta to arm the Rohingya fighters if they don't take back Rohingya refugee from Bangladesh.That threat worked and burmese junta forced to take back Rohingya and accepted them as an ethnic group of Arakan in one of their document.This news was published in Prothom alo 2-3 days ago.Do we have any one like him today? Even our military men are becoming ball less like our two old hags by serving under their govt.
 
.
Diplomacy: Myanmar has outsmarted Bangladesh
Dr. Dilara Choudhury
Entry of as many as four hundred thousand Rohingya refugees, following an attack on Myanmar’s security forces by Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) on August 28, 2017, and consequent genocide of Rohingyas by its security forces, Bangladesh is confronted with serious and numerous non-traditional security threats to its territorial integrity and sovereignty, and has become involved in global politics.

Naturally, questions abound about Government’s non-awareness of a calamity of such magnitude as well as its policies which could have prevented the country’s gargantuan security risks.
Dhaka’s obliviousness
Usually a given country’s security risks are tackled by being vigilant about international political development, especially the ones which may threaten its security, and thereby, undertaking a pro-active diplomacy, so that the conflict may be avoided. In case of Rohingya problem with Myanmar, Dhaka adopted none of the above, though the warning signals rang since late 1970s.

Dhaka fumbled twice in the 1970s and in the 1990s as it agreed to Myanmar’s conditional acceptance of their nationals without addressing the core issue, i.e. determining the criteria for Rohingya identity. Country with foresight and sagacity would have taken a note of it, especially in the 1990s, as the Rohingyas’ by then, had lost their Burmese nationality and basic rights through its reformed 1982 citizenship law and became virtually stateless.

It was not realized that if they are driven out of their country of residence as stateless Bengali illegal immigrants, their natural destination would be Bangladesh. However, till then Myanmar’s intransient attitude about Rohingya issue, though visible, had not yet become rigid. As evidenced now, Myanmar was simply buying time and an opportune time to deal with the Rohingya issue in their own way.

What perplexes us is Dhaka’s obliviousness even when UN and Human Rights Organizations were criticizing Myanmar’s Rohingya atrocities and predicting that an ‘ethnic cleansing’ was on the way following the renewed violence against the Rohingyas by Myanmar’s security forces in 2012.

It is really mindboggling that even then Dhaka did not internationalize the issue by raising it in various regional forums like SAARC, ASEAN, BIMSTEC, and keep our friendly and powerful regional countries such as China, India and Russia informed.
Lack of pro-active diplomacy
While continuing bilaterally with Myanmar, Dhaka’s foremost strategy should have been to undertake a vibrant, pro-active and preventive diplomacy, and convince the world that Rohingyas and Bangladeshis may have similar ethnic identity and religion but they are not Bengali immigrants as they have been living in Rakhine state (Arakan) since 9th century, and highlight its concerns about its potential destabilization, probably triggering a regional one, due to Myanmar’s actions against the Rohingyas.

Instead Dhaka has been all through and till recently was mostly busy with the repatriation procedure (Prothom Alo, Sept. 17, 2017).

Obviously, it is understood that the tremendous outcry in national and international arenas for Rohingya genocide in Myanmar and immediate support by the Islamic countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey and Maldives, which emanated due to emotional bond of a common religion, and those from the U.S. and European countries arising mostly for their humanitarian concerns and, cynical as it may be, lack of strategic and economic interest in Myanmar, especially after the U.S. withdrawal from TPP, and not due to Dhaka’s pro-active diplomacy.

Needless to say that Dhaka’s lack of diplomatic capacity has been responsible for the situation the country faces today. Bangladesh is friendless due to the way its foreign policy has been conducted. After years of diplomacy, how is it possible that Dhaka has no support on Rohingya issue, which is threatening its state security, by none of the powerful regional countries such as China, India and Russia?

Stand taken by these regional powers has glaringly highlighted Dhaka’s diplomatic debacle. It is, thus, crystal clear that none considered Bangladesh worth supporting for its inherent strategic and economic values, which would have served their own national interest –strategic and economic. That was not to be, especially in case of India and China.
Dhaka’s ‘India first’ policy
The fact of the matter is that Dhaka has been unsuccessful in maintaining a policy of equidistance from India and China, like that of Myanmar, which was possible due to its geo-strategic location. Bangladesh’s geo-strategic location is crucial for both the regional powers, no less than Myanmar, for their ambition to dominate Indian Ocean and become a world power. In that quest, both India and China need to have a foothold in Dhaka as Dhaka sits centrally along India initiated BCIM corridor and in a strategic position along China’s 21st century Maritime Silk Road.

By maximizing Dhaka’s geostrategic location through diplomatic endeavours, Bangladesh should have wooed both so that one would vie other in order to get Dhaka’s favour. Instead, Dhaka tilted heavily towards Delhi, especially since 2014, with its informal “India first” policy initiated by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to take care of India’s core security and economic interests (Xiar, Carnegie, New Delhi), that alienated China as its security interest was ignored.

China’s stand on Rohingya is, thus, understandable. But the people of Bangladesh are exacerbated by India’s role as there seems to be no quid pro quo in India-Bangladesh bilateral relations. As a result, Bangladesh find itself helpless as it has no leverage on its most trusted friend.
Myanmar and Rohingya Issue
While Dhaka was grappling with Rohingya problem, Myanmar, on the other hand, has been perusing its objective of Rohingya annihilation by taking systematic steps bilaterally and globally. Bilaterally, while dealing with Rohingyas’ identity issue, Myanmar satisfied Bangladesh by mutually agreeing that the refugees would be called neither Bengalis nor Rohingyas implicitly denying their historical claim, which kept Bangladesh at bay. Subsequently by emphasizing on their Muslim identity by Suu Kyi helped Myanmar to convince the world that Rohingyas are terrorists – a ploy, which would be bought by all – the West, China, India, and Russia as well, all of whom are tackling Islamic insurgencies in their own countries. The reason de tre, thus, was in place so that in the name of curbing terrorism Myanmar could wage genocide of Rohingyas.

However, China, India and Russia did not fall in line with Myanmar only due to their own insurgency problems as the military junta of Myanmar, demonstrating its extraordinary capacity in conducting global politics, embarked on a pro-active diplomacy. Sensing the emergence of a world order, not in place yet, in the form of China-Russia axis vis-a-vis India-Japan axis backed by a retreating pivotal power, the US, Myanmar’s policy of non-alignment, in this regard, prompted it to keep close ties with all major Asian powers.
Its dramatic success in wooing both China and India by accommodating strategic and economic interest of both is discernable as both are trying to please Myanmar in order to curb the influence of the other. Russia, too, became an ally as a potential partner of the possible emerging world order. Myanmar’s confidence in China and Russia has been well founded as both are supporting Myanmar all the way to UN Security Council, a body that has the power to punish Myanmar. Myanmar, thus, by setting the stage both bilaterally and internationally, lashed out with full vigour.
A friendless Bangladesh
As a friendless country, Bangladesh now will have to deal with this calamity, most probably, on its own. Suu Kyi’s recent address to her nation does not augur well for Bangladesh. She has been ambivalent all throughout her speech including the implementation Koffe Anan report as she is trying to dilute it by appointing a national Commission to look into the matter.

Bangladesh now needs to come together, evaluate its national politics as well as its foreign policy if it wants to live as a sovereign and independent country.

Professor Dilara Chowdhury is former faculty member of Jahangir Nagar University, Department of Government and politics and a political analyst
http://www.weeklyholiday.net/Homepage/Pages/UserHome.aspx
 
.
Sk. Hasina and Rohingyas: There is goodwill not political will
Afsan Chowdhury, September 23, 2017
ff041340f778619064afa98de3c05317-1_mini.jpg

In this Sept. 16, 2017, file photo, Abdul Kareem, a Rohingya Muslim man, carries his mother, Alima Khatoon, to a refugee camp after crossing over from Myanmar into Bangladesh, at Teknaf, Bangladesh. Picture: AP/Dar Yasin
Sheikh Hasina at this point is certainly more admired than Suu Kyi, but as her speech at the UN shows, she can gather a lot of goodwill but not the political will necessary to make Myanmar take back the Rohingya refugees. Her 5-point plan are more like appeals to a ‘conscientious’ world which in reality is a very cynical one. Sadly, for her, Bangladesh doesn’t matter much to the world and nobody is about to push resource rich Myanmar into doing something ‘humanitarian’. It’s obviously round one to Suu Kyi, a soiled icon cum military puppet and the Generals running the show in Myanmar.

The difference between Hasina and Suu Kyi on the refugee issues is that the Myanmar leader is a puppet by choice while the Bangladesh leader has been forced upon. Her proposals reflect that predicament of a leader without global power. None of the solutions she offers is in her hand and all are all up to Suu Kyi and her Generals to consider, making Hasina dependent on them as well.

As the most powerful politician Bangladesh has ever seen the situation must be painful to her. But she is harvesting at this moment, the collective failure of various governments of Bangladesh since the issue was born in the 70s. State bureaucracy, never encouraged to be pro-active has let the state leadership down.

Of the five points placed by her at the UNGA only is a call to practical action which is creation of a ‘safe zone’ a plan which the Myanmar government has already rejected. The rest are not going to considered because that would mean admitting that Myanmar had pushed the Rohingyas out and committed atrocities. Ultimately, the proposals are unrealistic because it depends on international political will not international goodwill to be enforced. And that is very missing.
Contradictions within Bangladesh
Bangladesh is also caught by its own contradictions. Rohingyas like any other refugee groups are not liked by Bangladeshis. Current sympathy is generated by two sources. First, the horror of the Rohingya refugee experiences as seen on media. And second, a common sense of Muslim identity. This identity part is a trifle complicated as it’s the Islamic groups that are pushing this and not the Government which is also aware that a religious identity generated movement as it may carry a large political cost.

However, sympathy is much less among many people living in the border district where the refugees have arrived. Public resentment is high there which was openly expressed in the initial days but are now muted as it would be interpreted as a ‘non-humanitarian’ expression which the official position now upholds. But refugee fatigue is inevitable and that may impact on Bangladesh’s internal politics.

The official reality is that the Government wasn’t expecting this latest huge rush and is being reactive without any preparation. Given that this is the third or fourth push from Myanmar since 1972 which each time has been bigger than the one before, those saying they never saw it coming are in denial. Why the authorities over several decades failed to see that coming remains a mystery. Even now, the main theme of the Government and its friends is “Myanmar must take them back” without saying how that is going to happen.

The authorities are caught between placing a “humanitarian’ image and a practical reality check of refugee management where it doesn’t look good. While the PM’s brave statement, “If we can feed 160 million we can feed another 700k” has gone down well with many, it is also pushing the line that Bangladesh can’t host such a large number of refugees for long.
A poor reading of what friendship means
Given the track record, Bangladesh may require a level of diplomatic capacity that it has not shown yet to manage the crisis internationally. Bangladesh is also in denial about its two main allies – China and India — letting it down. The silence of the official world about the positions taken by both is amazing though understandable. The statement of “support” by Indian Foreign Minister Sushama Swaraj has been described as a major diplomatic victory by the Bangladesh Foreign Office. However, this also shows that it has only a few inches of its foot inside India’s Foreign Office as it had no inkling about what the Indian position was on Myanmar though its Bangladesh’s closest neighbor in every way. China of course remains silent indicating that it really doesn’t need to even look ‘friendly’ in Bangladesh’s eyes.

Having trashed US for long, Bangladesh really hasn’t found the right language not to mention policy to make friendly gestures to the US. On top of that, the PM said, the US would offer nothing on the Rohingya issue though the Foreign office said that Trump will aid Bangladesh.

All in all, not a great phase for Bangladeshi diplomacy as it fails to mobilize global action which us understandable but also fails to present a policy based response on the Rohingya issue which should have been there. In the final interim audit, the personal image of Sheikh Hasina which has grown since the crisis began may be the most unexpected and only political windfall coming out of a crisis its struggling to understand let alone cope with.
http://southasianmonitor.com/2017/09/23/sk-hasina-rohingyas-goodwill-not-political-will/
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom