Connect with us

Southeast Asia

Enough! High Time to Put an End to Rohingya Crisis

Shariful Islam

Published

on

The world has witnessed a renewed genocide in Rakhine State over the Rohingya minorities. Such atrocities were also manifested in October last year which was also termed as the ‘ethnic cleansing’ by the UN official. It is estimated that more than 100,000 Rohingyas have been forcedly displaced by the state-sponsored violence.

Against this backdrop, around 1,30,000 Rohingyas fled into Bangladesh amid escalating violence.  This massive Rohingya entrance in Bangladesh has raised security concerns for the country.

Reportedly, Bangladesh has been hosting nearly half a million documented and undocumented Rohingyas since 1991 and has not deported any Rohingya refugee. Large-scale infiltration of Rohingyas into Bangladesh is observed in five phases: during 1978, 1991-92, 2012, 2016, and in 2017.

Myanmar government claims that Rohingyas are the illegal migrants from Bangladesh which the latter vehemently denies and argues that they should be repatriated. In fact, many Rohingyas say that their ancestors had lived in Myanmar for generations. Some ( Choudhury 2006; Kipgen 2013) claim that Rohingyas have lived in Myanmar for centuries and they are the descendants of Muslim Arabs, Moors, Persians, Turks, Mughals and Bengalis who came mostly as traders, warriors and saints through overland and sea-route. On contrary, Bangladesh disowns the Rohingyas on the legitimate grounds and has therefore denied them the refugee status since 1992. Although Bangladesh is not a signatory of 1951 Refugee Convention, the country hosts half a million Rohingyas in the country considering the humanitarian aspect of the problem and also the prospect of repatriation of the refugees to Myanmar. But the role of the UNHCR and international community regarding the repatriation is highly negligible. Instead of developing country, if Bangladesh would be a developed one, the response regarding the repatriation would be quite different. In fact, power-politics still guides the international politics and policy.

Rohingya refugees are found in different parts of Bangladesh. In his scholarly work, Ehsanul Haque contends that “The massive flow of them continues to pose major problems of food, health, accommodation, employment, access to land and business opportunities. The worst result is that all these problems in turn, jeopardise the public order and national security in Bangladesh” (Haque 2016:113). From the media reports, it can be claimed that Rohingyas are involved in different kinds of organized crimes including smuggling, arms and drugs trafficking, human trafficking. In addition, there is serious allegation that Rohingya refugees are fanning Islamist militancy in Bangladesh. They are also involved in passport forgery cases in Bangladesh which is a serious criminal offence.

Against the plight of the Rohingyas, the pertinent question is what can be done to resolve the crisis? In different times, Myanmar operationalized atrocities over Rohingyas in the Rakhine State. In fact, the world did very little to resolve the longstanding man-made humanitarian crisis. The role of the international community is also negligible to pressurize Myanmar government to resolve the Rohingya issue. In addition, the role of the UNHCR and IOM needs to be looked at very critically. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees did little to resolve the Rohingya crisis which merits serious attention.

The role of the international media and international human rights organizations also need to be looked at critically to this particular issue. In fact, the gross violation of human rights of the Rohingyas in Rakhine state received very negligible coverage throughout global media. I often wonder that if the same level of atrocities would occur in the United States or in the Europe, would the global media or the international human rights organizations or even the international community respond on the same pace?

Power-knowledge nexus is also manifested in this Rohingya issue. The volume of scholarship in this issue is very poor. This issue also becomes marginal in the agenda setting whether in media or in the academia which should not be the case.

There is also international politics over this issue. Human Rights Watch, for instance, thinks that “Bangladesh Should Accept, Protect Rohingya Refugees” and open her border for Rohingya refugees. International community also thinks that Bangladesh should let them in. It raises question that first of all, it’s not legal obligation for Bangladesh since she is neither a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention nor its 1967 Protocol. Secondly, why Bangladesh? Why not Europe, India, China, Australia, Saudia Arabia, Turkey, Iran, Indonesia or the United States where there is ample space and opportunities? Thus, a coordinated approach from the international community is needed to resolve the longstanding Rohingya crisis.

Unfortunately, there is also politics over the Rohingya issue among our political parties who often prioritize their regime interest instead of national interest. For the sake of humanitarian grounds, long-term negative implications for Bangladesh are left out which merits serious attention. Thus, for the greater interests of Bangladesh, Rohingya issue should not be used as a political means by the political regimes in Bangladesh to uphold their narrowly defined regime interest.

It is time to recognize that Rohingya issue has created serious problems in Bangladesh in national security dimension considering the growing involvement of Rohingyas in different criminal activities in the country. The international community needs to acknowledge that Bangladesh has already done a lot in the Rohingya issue. Now it’s the turn for the Myanamr government and the international community to resolve the crisis. The role of China and India becomes important to resolve the crisis. In addition, the role of ASEAN to resolve the crisis becomes critical. It must intervene to stop the genocide over the Rohingya minorities.

Most importantly, Myanmar needs to stop genocide over Rohingyas from a more democratic and humanitarian ground. In fact, historical evidence candidly suggests that Rohingyas are the descendants of Muslim traders who have been in Myanmar for more than one hundred years. Thus, it raises question that why these Rohingyas will be subject to discrimination, torture and chauvinism by the Buddhist majority there?  Why the plight of the Rohingyas will not be heard, and resolved by the international community? In fact, coming in this 21st century, such genocide is quite unexpected and hence, unacceptable.

Thus, Myanmar needs to stop denying the basic rights of the Rohingyas for the sake of humanity and greater interests of Myanmar. In fact, due to the Myanmar’s transition to democracy, along with the world, Bangladesh also expected that there will be qualitative shift in Myanmar’s policy to resolve the longstanding Rohingya crisis. But unfortunately it did not happen. Resolving the contentious Rohingya issue is a must to explore and harness the untapped potentials in Bangladesh-Myanmar relations. From Bangladesh side, a strong, and united stance is expected with regard to dealing with Rohingya issue. Bangladesh needs to use friendship with India and China to pressurize Myanmar government to resolve the issue. Finally, the international community needs to wake up and act to resolve the crisis at the earliest at least for the sake of humanity or it will be too late.

Md. Shariful Islam is an assistant professor in International Relations at the University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh. Currently, he is on study leave and pursuing Ph.D. in International Relations at South Asian University, New Delhi. Email: shariful_ruir[at]ru.ac.bd

Continue Reading
Comments

Southeast Asia

Indonesia: Balanced politics amid major powers

Published

on

In 2020, Russia and Indonesia will mark 70 years to the establishment of  diplomatic relations between the two countries. Given that the epicenter of the geopolitical activity is currently shifting towards the Asia-Pacific Region (APR), the role of Indonesia as the planet’s strategically important location increases.

Along with Russia, there are a number of other countries that are as keen on developing ties with Indonesia. One of them is Australia, which is particularly active due to its geographical location.

Indonesia and Australia boast a comprehensive bilateral strategic partnership agreement, which defines them as “strategic anchors of the Indo-Pacific Region”. According to tradition, each newly elected Australian Prime Minister pays his first foreign visit to Indonesia. Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who took office on August 24, 2018, kept the tradition as well.

In Jakarta, Morrison met with Indonesian partners to discuss the details of a strategic cooperation agreement, which envisages economic cooperation, security measures, exploitation of marine resources, ensuring stability in the Indo-Pacific Region and social projects.

According to the Jakarta Maritime Policy Strategy (Global Maritime Fulcrum), Indonesia is regarded as the fulcrum between the Indian and the Pacific. Canberra also sees Jakarta as key to Australia’s defense strategy.

Indonesia’s territory embraces most of the archipelagoes north of Australia and these make a convenient springboard for a hypothetical threat to the Australian coast. In addition, Indonesia stands at the junction of marine and air routes from Australia to Europe and from Australia to Asia-Pacific countries. Joint naval exercises run by the Indonesian and Australian defense ministries account for 24% of the total, while 33% of the drills are held by the Air Forces, 30% by special services and special task forces, and 2% by the peacekeeping contingents.

Australia became the third country with which Jakarta signed a comprehensive strategic cooperation agreement after the United States (2013) and China (2015). In 2017, the two parties signed the Joint Declaration on Maritime Cooperation, in 2018 – the Maritime Cooperation Action Plan, covering 85 areas with the participation of 17 Australian and 20 Indonesian departments and agencies.

Australia finds Indonesia more important than Indonesia finds Australia. As a single continent, Australia attaches particular importance to foreign policy with a view to ensure its national security. As for Indonesia, it has a more introverted policy. Being the largest island nation on the planet, Jakarta aims to guarantee its security through internal consolidation of the many islands that make up the Indonesian state.

Pursuing the policy of “non-alignment”, Indonesia seeks to diversify foreign economic and foreign policy relations. This becomes clear from the previous development of the Indonesian-Australian relations: Jakarta would quickly freeze projects with Canberra once it spotted a disproportionate presence of Australia in Indonesian politics.

That was the case in 1999 when Jakarta withdrew from the Security Agreement, signed in 1995, in 2013 when it suspended defense cooperation and cooperation between special services, and 2016 when it suspended the language training of military personnel.

For Indonesia, a multi-vector foreign policy is crucial for maintaining a healthy balance of power in the region. For this reason, Moscow is an attractive economic partner for Jakarta. That Russian-Indonesian contacts have been developing at fast pace can be concluded from the fact that there have been several meetings between the two countries’ presidents, that Russia has been supplying Indonesia with weapons, that the two countries’ armed forces have held joint exercises, that Indonesian representatives have participated in business forums in Russia and that the Russian capital has revealed in interest in Indonesia’s projects in the mining industry.

Jakarta and Moscow are considering prospects for the introduction of a free trade zone in Indonesia and the EEU. Indonesia is also ready to join the Chinese global infrastructure project “One Belt, One Road.”

Under the project, Chinese investments in the Indonesian transport infrastructure amount to $ 6 billion, which is clearly not enough for a rapid growth of transit of commodities and haulages from China and the Asia-Pacific countries through Indonesia. Indonesia’s medium-term economic development plan stipulates local financing at 63% (4). The rest should come from foreign investors, which could include Russia.

First published in our partner International Affairs

Continue Reading

Southeast Asia

Improving Vocational Education in Thailand: An interview with Khunying Sumonta Promboon

Rattana Lao

Published

on

Her Royal Highness Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn visited Chitlarada Technology College with a welcome by Associate Professor Khunying Sumonta Promboon, the President of Chitralada Technology College

Bangkok – When robots are advancing and industries are playing catch up to technological advancement, vocational education plays a pivotal role in national development. Instead of arcane theory, vocational education trains students with sophisticated, hands on and practical skills needed to excel in the world of work. Vocational training offers an up to date and cutting edged techniques for students not only comply but push technical boundaries forward. Countries that excel in their industrialization all champion vocational education – Germany, China and Taiwan to name but a few.

Thailand, despite setting its eyes for Thailand 4.0 to transform its economy to digitalization, automation and robotics, is falling behind the race to the top. The World Bank found that 40% of the top tier international firms reported the inadequate skills as the major constraint. While the country is in much needed position for vocational education, there are only 1 million students in vocational school comparing to 2.5 millions in higher education. Although the country has more than 900 vocational colleges, students opt for higher education because better images and prestigious. When news about vocational education in Thailand are filled with images of violent students and gang fights amongst students, there is a dire need to reform this important sector. Rattana Lao, Program Officer in Policy and Research at the Asia Foundation, talked to Associate Professor Khunying Sumonta Promboon, the President of Chitralada Technology College on ways in which Thailand vocational education can reform itself to better respond to national demand: One step at a time.

What role should vocational education play in Thailand?

Vocational education should be the main educational track to educate and encourage young students to partake in the national development of the country. After receiving basic education of grade 1 to 9, the majority of students should enroll in vocational education. However, the case of Thailand is different. The majority of Thai students like to enroll in basic education of grade 10 to 12 and continue to enroll in universities rather than vocational education.

How can one promote vocational education?

Many factors need to be taken into account in order to incentivize more students to enroll in vocational education.

Firstly, students need to have guaranteed employment. Such employment should begin when they are still students, an internship of some sorts. This requires a close collaboration between educational institutes and corporates. A symbiosis between the two stakeholders is necessary. This is not widespread in Thailand. The opportunities are still inadequate and limited to a few top students in colleges rather than available equally to all students.

Secondly, the social attitude must change. In Thailand, parents want their children attend higher education and receive bachelor degrees, master degrees and PhD. To change this attitude, it will take time. It goes back to the first point that students need secure employment.

We incorporated these ideas into the creation of Chitralada Technology College. We want to take lead in enabling students who take vocational education with us being able to transfer into higher education later on– making the opportunities for education and employment aligned.

What are the problems of vocational education in Thailand?

The first problem is the social bias. People prefer basic education because its more prestigious. The second problem is students do not know the diversity of career paths. They know only limited choices of teachers, soldiers and doctors. The educational counselling in Thailand needs an improvement.

What does Chitralada Technology College try to do?

There are two institutes within the same umbrella. The first is Chitralada Vocational School and the second is Chitralada Technology College. There are total number of 800 students in these two institutes. Although we are small in sizes, we would like to lead best practices in term of vocational educational practices. There are many programs that we offer for students.

What is your strategy to promote vocational education in Thailand that is different from others?

We have extensive networks of 67 businesses throughout Thailand as well as partnered with other organizations. In total, we have MOUs with more than 80 institutions. We partnered with Singapore, China and Germany.

Can you give examples?

With China, we partnered with Leshan Vocational Technical College. They accept our students’ exchanges for culinary school. There is also Tienjin Sino-German Vocational Technical College that we partner about mechatronics. With Singapore, we work with Singapore Polytechnique. We are beginning to initiate exchanging programs with Temasek and Singapore Polytechnique. Last year, we took Singapore students to Sumutsongkarm to visit local communities who produce shrimp pastes. It’s impressive idea they are creating. There is also Senior Expert Project we partner with Germany. Mostly it is about mechanics and mechatronics.

How do these collaborations help Thailand?

These are successful countries who implemented vocational education and we can learn from them.

There are a lot of pictures of Her Royal Highness Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn. How does HRH inspire this college?

Her idea is to educate students according to their talents. Those who do not like academic track should have the opportunity to pursue other alternatives. Her Royal Highness plays a monumental role to guide our college’s direction and inspires us to excel. When HRH visits other countries, HRH enables the college to expand our collaboration with successful institutions from abroad.

We want to change the images of vocational students in Thailand from being violent students to be responsible students.

Continue Reading

Southeast Asia

Indonesia shaping the South East Asian foreign policy of India and Sri Lanka

Published

on

Authors: Srimal Fernando and Megha Gupta*

Indonesia with more than 17,000 islands, occupies a key geopolitical position in the ten-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) regional bloc. In the recent past Indonesia has been trying to strengthen its foreign policy outlook both diplomatically and economically through bilateral or multilateral means.

Indonesia with its large population, military capabilities, vast territory and rich natural resources in Southeast Asia is trying to align with India possessing similar power potentialities in South Asia. With this strategy in mind Indonesia has been trying to access the 1.3 billion Indian consumer market and also has been trying to cooperate with Sri Lanka due to its vital geographical position in the Indian Ocean. In this regard, there has been a growing bilateral and trilateral interest among these three countries such that they can tap into the consumer and producer market hence generating higher revenue. However, these three financial hotspots have found themselves in the forefront of challenges posed by globalization and this makes it vital for them to revive their cooperation in different areas.

Over the past few decades, Indonesia has made several development landmarks through restructuring its polity and society. The economy and foreign policy goals of this nation have constructively transformed from President Sukarno to Joko. Furthermore, in the 1980’s Indonesia also took a large step in establishing the regional body of ASEAN. Since then for more than a quarter century, ASEAN has been the most important reason for bilateral and multilateral engagements between Indonesia and the two South Asian countries.

Currently, the two-way trade between Indonesia and India stands at about $18.13 billion according to the Indonesia’s Central Statistics Agency (bps).  With this mutually beneficial relationship, in the coming years Indonesia and India are planning to enhance their bilateral trade to $50 billion. There is also said to be an increased strategic, defense and security partnership between the two which got reiterated with the state visit of the Indonesian President Joko Widodo.

Similarly, the trade between Indonesia and Sri Lanka has doubled from $418 million in 2011 to around a billion dollar in the recent past and the ties between the two is set to improve further with the establishment of a future Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The year 2018 has also marked the 66th Anniversary of the diplomatic relationship between Indonesia and Sri Lanka where the visit of the Indonesian President after 40 years saw the signing of a series of agreements between the two island nations.

Since the Bandung Summit of 1955, the Indonesia’s relationship with India and Sri Lanka has been strong. Later ASEAN has played a leading role in making this partnership grow further. However, India’s cooperation with Indonesia and ASEAN serves as a test bed for the new ideas to grow between the two regions.

Indonesia positioned between Southeast Asia and Australasia is a crucial gateway for India and Sri Lanka to further their foreign, economic and security endeavors in these two regions.

*Megha Gupta, a scholar of Masters in Diplomacy, Law, Business at Jindal School of International Affairs, India.

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2018 Modern Diplomacy