is History About to Repeat Itself?

By Jeff Crisp 22 March 2023

The place precisely does the United Nations Excessive Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) stand on the repatriation of Rohingya refugees from Bangladesh to Myanmar?

It’s not simple to say. On the one hand, the UNHCR insists that “situations in Rakhine State are at present not conducive to the sustainable return of Rohingya refugees.” The group claims subsequently that it’s “not concerned” in a pilot mission meant to kick-start the repatriation course of, established by Bangladesh and Myanmar with the backing of China.

However, following the publication of a leaked e mail from the pinnacle of the UN in Myanmar, UNHCR has acknowledged that it offered “logistical assist” to representatives of Myanmar’s navy regime who had been travelling to Bangladesh to provoke the pilot mission.

In accordance with Chris Gunness of the Myanmar Accountability Undertaking, UNHCR boats, stripped of their company insignia, had been offered to the delegation after “a really agency request” from the junta, which stays unrecognized by the UN.

Gunness additionally alleges that weapons had been allowed onto the boats, in contravention of the UN’s strict safety protocols.

Whereas disturbing, these developments ought to come as no shock given UNHCR’s longstanding tendency to acquiesce to the calls for of Bangladesh and Myanmar, somewhat than upholding the precept that refugee repatriation ought to be strictly protected and voluntary in nature.

In 1993, for instance, a senior UNHCR workers member described the Rohingya as “primitive individuals”, observing that “on the finish of the day they are going to go the place they’re advised to go.”

This dismissive perspective in direction of the Rohingya, a predominantly Muslim minority group who usually are not acknowledged as residents of Myanmar, has some deep historic roots.

In February 1978, an assault by the Myanmar navy prompted some 200,000 Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh. Between August 1978 and December 1979, virtually all of these refugees returned to Myanmar underneath a bilateral settlement between the 2 nations and with the engagement of UNHCR.

A later evaluation ready by UNHCR’s Analysis Service revealed that it was “extremely questionable” whether or not the 1978 repatriation was voluntary. “Early repatriation,” it defined, “was the federal government of Bangladesh’s precedence from the outset of the disaster.”

And to attain that goal, a wide range of techniques had been employed, together with bodily intimidation of the Rohingya and the withholding of meals and different important help from the refugees. Within the phrases of 1 UNHCR workers member, “Bangladesh authorities coverage had turn into one actually of ravenous the refugees into leaving.”

In January 1980, as soon as the repatriation had concluded, UNHCR acknowledged that as much as 10,000 refugees had died within the camps, citing epidemics because the principal trigger. Privately, nonetheless, workers within the area agreed that the excessive mortality charge was a results of the federal government’s failure to distribute meals provides that had been available within the nation. “

Can there be an excuse,” one requested, “for a global group like UNHCR, whose transient is refugee welfare, to acquiesce in a coverage which ends up in greater than 9,000 pointless deaths.”

A decade later in 1991 and 1992 Myanmar’s armed forces launched an extra assault on the Rohingya, involving killings, sexual violence and the destruction of settlements and mosques. Escaping from the violence, round 250,000 Rohingya fled once more to Bangladesh.

Subsequent occasions bore a putting resemblance to these of 1978. Bangladesh started negotiating a repatriation settlement with Myanmar in November 1991, at a time when Rohingya refugees had been nonetheless fleeing in important numbers.

Whereas stipulating that returns can be “protected and voluntary”, the settlement additionally stated that repatriation ought to start by Could 1992 and be accomplished inside six months.

As soon as once more, stress was positioned on the refugees in an try to fulfill that concentrate on. In February 1992, Bangladesh said its intention to restrict the help offered to the Rohingya, as “it could not want to create a pole of attraction for extra refugees.”

The unfavourable penalties of this method shortly grew to become obvious. Simply 4 months later, a UNHCR workers member noticed that ‘in 1978, some 10,000 refugees had died from issues referring to insufficient help. The current line of the federal government is coming dangerously near making a repetition of this tragedy’.”

Whereas lauded as successful in official UNHCR statements, this second repatriation was each controversial and contradictory to refugee safety ideas. Because the Analysis Service’s later evaluation said, some UNHCR workers “weren’t satisfied that the refugees actually needed to return or that the situations for voluntary repatriation in security and dignity may very well be met.”

The evaluate concluded that “refugees believed they’d no selection and accepted a repatriation that they feared and didn’t want to undertake as a result of they had been advised to take action by UNHCR and the authorities and believed they’d no different selection.”

Related conclusions may very well be drawn a couple of Bangladeshi operation to relocate Rohingya refugees from the nation’s mainland to the distant island of Bhasan Char, following the violent expulsion of as much as one million Rohingya by the Myanmar navy in 2017.

Quite a few questions have been raised about this program, which has hitherto seen the relocation of some 30,000 refugees.

Are the Rohingya going willingly to Bhasan Char, or are they being induced to go away by the Bangladesh authorities? Will they be allowed to go away the island in the event that they discover life too troublesome there or need to reunite with relations on the mainland? What penalties shall be imposed on them in the event that they go away the island with out permission?

Can an island that’s composed largely of silt, which got here into existence solely 20 years in the past and that was beforehand unpopulated actually maintain the livelihoods of the 80,000 refugees who’re scheduled to be relocated there?

Such questions stay unresolved. In accordance with a current NGO report, “complete data on the bottom has but to be compiled and analysed strategically.” Specific considerations stay, it stated, with respect to “meals insecurity, ranges of financial vulnerability, livelihood coping mechanisms and earnings alternatives.”

And with respect to freedom of motion, tons of of refugees have been arrested after attempting to go away the island. In accordance with the Bangladeshi official accountable for Bhasan Char, “restrictions on their motion will proceed. They received’t be allowed to maneuver outdoors the camp.”

Regardless of this array of difficulties, the UN generally and UNHCR particularly have agreed to be concerned within the implementation of the relocation programme, elevating additional points with respect to the way in which wherein state pursuits seem to take priority over the rights and well-being of Rohingya refugees.

Given the pilot mission now launched by Bangladesh and Myanmar one has to ask whether or not the 2 nations are once more getting ready to orchestrate the mass and involuntary repatriation of Rohingya refugees. And in view of its acquiescence to the “very agency request” of the Myanmar junta, will UNCHR and different UN businesses finally show prepared to take part in such an initiative.

On this respect, the involvement of China is especially ominous. A rustic with an appalling human rights report, a brutal disregard for its personal Muslim minority and a dedication to lock Myanmar into its sphere of affect, the Beijing authorities is unlikely to be very scrupulous in respecting the notion that refugee repatriation ought to be strictly protected and voluntary in nature.

And, like Myanmar itself, China has an evident political curiosity in demonstrating that refugees are returning to a rustic the place a level of safety and stability has been restored, thereby legitimizing the forthcoming elections that the junta has stated it is going to maintain.

China is a rising regional and international energy. It’s a everlasting member of the UN Safety Council and has made strenuous efforts to strengthen its position within the financial, social and humanitarian dimensions of the world physique’s work.

In such circumstances, would UN Secretary-Common Antonio Guterres – previously the UN’s Excessive Commissioner for Refugees – be able to oppose a China-backed plan to repatriate the Rohingya, even when situations are “not conducive to return” in Myanmar?

Dr. Jeff Crisp was beforehand Head of Analysis and Coverage Growth at UNHCR and now volunteers for United Towards Inhumanity.