Connect with us

Southeast Asia

Myanmar’s Irresponsibility in Rohingya Refugee Repatriation: The World Must Act Now

Published

on

At the 75th Session of the United Nations General Assembly Debate, Myanmar claimed that “Both the terrorist group ARSA and the terrorist insurgent group AA have used Bangladeshi territory as a sanctuary”. It is ironic that instead of facilitating the Rohingya repatriation, Myanmar is spreading propaganda, fabricated and false information to avoid their obligation to repatriation. In fact, it is well known to the world that Bangladesh follows a “zero-tolerance policy” to terrorism, terrorists financing and other drivers of terrorism under the leadership of Sheikh Hasina. Sheikh Hasina, the Prime Minister of Bangladesh has ensured that Bangladesh territory is not used by any terrorist.

It is nothing new for Myanmar. Myanmar also labeled Rohingyas as terrorist earlier to systematically persecute them. It is reported that Mandalay monk Ashin Wirathu used “social media to spread often false stories about Muslims, regularly denigrating them in speeches as mad dogs and rapists. Those that dare challenge Wirathu’s view of events quickly become the target of his invective. UN envoy Yanghee Lee was labelled a ‘whore’ when she stood up for the rights of the Muslim Rohingya minority” (Fisher 2015).

Indeed, Rohingyas were framed as “terrorist”, as the “enemy” of the state of Myanmar to occupy their lands. Donald M. Seekins rightly notes that “in a classic ‘divide-and-rule’ strategy, both military regimes have enlisted Arakanese Buddhists in attacks on Rohingya communities, and, after evicting the Muslims, allowed the Arakanese Buddhists to occupy their lands” (Seekins 2006:383).

Myanmar also claimed in the UN General Assembly that 350 Rohingyas from camps in Cox’s Bazar district had returned to Myanmar’s Rakhine State. Bangladesh raised questions over Myanmar’s such claim and wanted to know the whereabouts of those returnees. Bangladesh asks that: “Who are those 350 people? Where are they now? Are they living at their homes in safety and security?”. It is ironic that while Bangladesh is hosting more than 1.1 million Rohingyas since August 2017, though false claim, the number of 350 becomes a matter of joke.

The fact is that on January 16, 2018, Bangladesh and Myanmar signed a document on Physical Arrangement to facilitate the return of Rohingyas to their homeland. But unfortunately two repatriation attempts were failed in November 2018 and August 2019 due to Myanmar’s lack of political will and lack of seriousness by the international community to pressurize the Myanmar government.

In fact, Myanmar failed to create a safe and favourable condition for the Rohingya repatriation. Thus, no Rohingya is interested to repatriate. Myanmar did not show any interest to implement the repatriation deal signed with Bangladesh. Unfortunately, Myanmar has backing from the major powers including China, Russia, and India in the Rohingya issue. Consequently, Myanmar did not face severe international pressure on facilitating a successful Rohingya repatriation.

In the UN General Assembly, Myanmar identifies Rohingya crisis as a bilateral problem between Myanmar and Bangladesh. But it is Myanmar’s internal problem. It has been created by Myanmar and has to be resolved by Myanmar, as the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina noted in the UN General Assembly. Bangladesh as a good neighbourly attitude  opened doors to the helpless Rohingyas who were raped, tortured, and killed by the Myanmar armies.While major powers in the region including China, India closed their doors to the Rohingya crisis, did Bangladesh make the wrong decision to show greater humanity to the Rohingyas, to save lives? Unfortunately, Bangladesh became a victim of Myanmar’s atrocities to the Rohingya refugees as Myanmar is not showing any concrete interest to repatriate those Rohingyas now. On the other hand, the international community also failed to make a successful repatriation though three years have already passed.

One needs to look at the genealogy of the Rohingyas to make a successful repatriation.If one looks at the existing literature on the Rohingyas, it was in fact 1799 when Francis Buchanan contends that “I shall now add three dialects, spoken in the Burma Empire, but evidently derived from the language of the Hindu nation. The first is that spoken by the Mohammedans, who have long settled in Arakan, and who call themselves Rooinga, or natives of Arakan.” (Reprinted 2003:55). Michael W. Charney from the School of Oriental and African Studies [SOAS], University of London thinks that “the derivation of Rohingya from Roainga is very clear” (Charney 2005). Moshe Yegar (1972:2) in his book The Muslims of Burma: A Study of a Minority Group notes that “Muslim seamen first reached Burma in the ninth century. Although geographically on the perimeter of the major trade routes, Burma nevertheless enjoyed rather lively shipping activity which brought in its wake the beginnings of a Muslim settlement.” Yegar traced the ancestors of the Rohingyas to the Arab and Persian traders.Therefore, the lineage of the Rohingyas in Arakan was strongly found in earlier Burma which indicates that they are living in the country throughout centuries. This genealogy of the Rohingyas needs to be used by the international community to pressurize the Myanmar government and ensure the safety and well-being of the Rohingyas by ensuring their safe return in the Arakan state of Myanmar.

The international community needs to visit in the Arakan state and monitor the situation there to understand the conducive environment for the return of the Rohingya refugees. The international media needs to report the situation in Myanmar on a regular basis so that the world becomes well-aware of the developments there.

Finally, Bangladesh is providing food, shelter, medicare and other services to more than 1.1 million Rohingya refugees since August 2017 but cannot handle such a huge people for a long time. Rohingya refugee crisis has already created economic, environmental, ecological, and social problems for Bangladesh. The country has already sacrificed a lot for the Rohingya refugees including its hundreds of acres of forests. The world needs to know that more than 170 million people live in 1,47, 570 square k.m. area with limited resources in Bangladesh which makes it one of the most densely populated countries in the world. The world community needs to understand that it becomes a daunting task for Bangladesh to continue its whole-hearted support for the Rohingya refugee given the existing socio-economic realities of Bangladesh.

Unfortunately, it is already three years passed but concrete actions either from Myanmar government or from international community is absent. Thus, the proactive support of global community is a must now to address this crisis. One can also note that the scholars, the media, the civil society organizations, the human rights organizations in the world needs to come forward to mobilize global support in favour of Rohingya refugee repatriation as none can avoid its responsibility to address the crisis.

The bottom-line is that Myanmar’s irresponsibility to repatriate the Rohingya refugee became the key challenge. Myanmar needs to stop spreading propaganda against the peaceful Bangladesh. It is Myanmar’s responsibility to ensure the safe return of the Rohingyas in Myanmar who were living in Myanmar throughout centuries as the historical document suggests. In this case, the accountability of the state of Myanmar to successfully repatriate the Rohingyas needs to be ensured by the international community. The culprits of the genocide need to be brought under the justice system so that such a caseis not repeated in the future. The future generations will not forgive the Myanmar government and the international community if they fail to show humanity, to ensure justice to a great tragedy, to the Rohingya crisis. The world must act now.

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

Vietnam’s President Phuc visit to Switzerland and Russia

Published

on

Image source: chinhphu.vn

Vietnam’s President Nguyen Xuan Phuc visited Switzerland and Russia(November25-December 2) to promote his country’s bilateral ties with the two countries. During the visit to Switzerland, the Vietnamese president initiated a link between the Swiss state and Vietnam. For Vietnam, which has already ordered and administered eight different vaccines in its country to protect its citizens from the COVID-19 pandemic, the need is to procure more vaccines. The immediate urgency is to get medical equipment and to import resuscitation supporting machines so that critically ill patients should be saved. In terms of medical equipment and diagnostics procedures, Switzerland is one of the foremost countries for research in fields of diagnostics, pharmacy, lifesaving medicines and new kinds of vaccine development. Vietnam has been facing immense threat from the new variants of COVID-19 and related complications. The country is looking for conclusion of free trade agreement with European free trade association. The European Free Trade Association comprises of Norway, Switzerland, and Lichtenstein, There are also immense possibilities of improving the trade basket between the two trade partners. Vietnam is slowly emerging as an alternate manufacturing destination too.

The total volume of trade between Vietnam and Switzerland is more than 3.5 billion U.S. dollars. Vietnam which was the permanent member of the UN Security Council for the year 2020-21 is looking for developing better understanding and greater participation in international institutions such as United Nations, its affiliate organizations and the World Trade Organization(WTO).

Switzerland is also one of the enticing destinations for Vietnamese travelers and it is expected that there might be possibility of more flights between the two countries. During the visit to Switzerland discussions were held also with regard to promoting defence relations, interaction between the legal bodies of the two countries, promoting science and technology interactions between different institutions, encouraging investment from Switzerland to Vietnam, and also celebrating five decades of establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. President Phuc concluded his visit to Switzerland on November 29th and went to Moscow to hold meetings with its counterpart Vladimir Putin. 

During the visit to Russia, the two sides discussed areas to promote further cooperation in realizing the true potential of comprehensive strategic partnership and developing coordination in areas such as humanitarian and disaster relief. One of the important milestones during the visit of President Phuc has been the signing of bilateral agreement on vaccine production so that Sputnik V could be produced in Vietnam. The agreement which was signed between Vabiotech and Russian Direct Investment Fund(RDIF) would promote development of Sputnik V vaccine research in Vietnam, and developing resilient supply chains within Vietnam so that the vaccine can be produced in that country. One of the interesting aspects of this agreement is development of a Research Center and a small lab to look into efficacy of the vaccine and develop new formulations to counter the new variants of Coronavirus. Other prominent areas include developing cyber security architecture, exchange of cultural troupes, research in renewable energy and promoting sports between the two countries. Vietnam is emerging as one of the important sources for iron ore and therefore Vietnam now wants to diversify its vehicle manufacturing facility.

In fact, that Vietnam is increasingly reliant on Russia for its defence imports and in the past have imported sophisticated frigates, Sukhoi 30 aircraft, and Kilo class submarines. The growing defence relationship between the two sides is also expected to further expand in terms of sonar systems, supersonic missiles, air defence equipment, and training of sailors and technicians. 

Vietnam and Russia have a long-standing relationship even after the disintegration of the USSR. Russia has been very supportive of Vietnam efforts with regard to countering the three major powers which included France, the US, and China. The three Vietnam wars and the valor of the Vietnamese soldiers were much appreciated in erstwhile Soviet Union and thereafter by Russia. The historic ties  between the two countries was much appreciated and there has been much research which has been done with regard to cultural, historical, and political interactions between the two sides.

 The visit of President Phuc is seen as a new addition to the relationship as the president stated in one of the business interactions that the two sides should lift their trade by 15 times and also facilitate investment in each other’s countries. During one of these interactions, he clearly stated that Vietnam has emerged as one of the top 20 priority countries and therefore Russian investors should look forward for investing in Vietnam. He urged the Russian companies to capitalize on the free trade agreements that Vietnam has signed with Eurasian Economic Union and also understand the liberalization measures that Vietnam has undertaken in the recent past.

In the joint statement, which was released between the two sides it was clearly articulated that there is mutual respect and friendship between the two countries. The foundation of this relationship has been through mutual trust, territorial integrity, right to self-determination, and no use or threat of force against each other. The joint statement clearly stated that the two countries will work together in the field of security, military interaction, defence, and developing new technologies in defence sector. In the joint statement it was also stated that the two sides should work on capability planning, training, developing better science and technology cooperation, and forge strategic partnership in areas such as international law and promote interactions in UN agencies. The joint statement also alluded to the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS) and it was particularly important in the context of developing issues in South China Sea. 

President Phuc used his diplomatic acumen to issue a joint statement in which there was clear reference with regard to developments in South China Sea. Russia supported Vietnam’s endeavor for full and effective implementation of the Declaration of the Code of Conduct of the South China Sea parties (DOC) under the 2002 agreement. Another important aspect was looking into sectors for promoting ASEAN Russia relationship and realize the potential of the comprehensive action plan between the two sides. The visit to Switzerland and Russia was effective and it met the objectives which were laid out in terms of achievements and new ideas which would be put into practice for the future. 

Continue Reading

Southeast Asia

Local Wisdom Brings Everybody Towards Sustainability

Published

on

Me and the Bajo kids posing with clamshell powder. Source: Author’s Collection

Climate change, carbon emission, zero waste, circular economy, and sustainability. If you are anywhere on the internet just like 62% of the world’s population, chances are you must be familiar, have understood, or at least have heard of these 21st century buzzwords. If you Google search the word ‘sustainable’, it would give you more results than if you search for ‘Titanic’, ‘globalization’, even ‘BTS’. Clearly, people all around the world has been putting more and more attention towards the concept of sustainability.

The question is, how well do we understand sustainability? What is being sustainable in development, business, and life in general entail?

Sustainability concepts were built on the foundation of protecting the resources of the Earth and the wellbeing of humankind which are negatively impacted by our abusive patterns of production and consumption. The Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) in its highly-cited Brundtland Report, also called Our Common Future, formally defined sustainable development as development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own need. The Triple Bottom Line (TBL) first coined by John Elkington in 1994 is the fundamental concept in business to balance Profit, People, and Planet[1]. The concept really gained its momentum when the United Nations (UN) in 2015 set out 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be adopted and achieved through global partnership by its Member States in 2030.

As a way of thinking, however, balancing wealth, society, and the environment has actually been a part of traditional belief systems, religious teachings, medieval philosophies, and communal ways of living for centuries. Indigenous people all over the world for years have developed and for the most part maintained cultural knowledge, norms, and rules that stem from the adaptation process to the environment, commonly referred to as the local wisdom. Long before the natural, organic, free-this-and-that-synthetic skincare boom, People of Bajo or the Sea Gypsies community have been harnessing the ingredients provided by Earth as their recipe to having healthy and firm skin despite being out in the sea under the sun for most of the time. They would make use of the clams’ shells or rice grain mixed with herbs like turmeric to make powder that would protect their skin from the scorching sun.

Local wisdom is also at the heart of many customary rules, including activities to manage their natural resources. For instance, many indigenous coastal communities in Eastern Indonesia implement Sasi Laut that would only allow fishing in certain areas for around two weeks to three months and close for one to two years. This local wisdom embodies the concept of marine conservation and has been passed down from generation to generation. Globally, indigenous people that constitutes less than 5% of the world’s population is protecting around 80% of the planet’s biodiversity.

Moreover, economic, environmental and social issues come in different form and intensity in different countries and communities. It might be pollution for urban area, declining water quality for tourism destination, or the non-existence of proper waste management system for rural area. Thus, achieving sustainability would require a bottom-up approach in identifying the most pressing problem in a particular country or community. The integration of local wisdom would contextualize the existing varied frameworks, concepts, tools, and innovations on sustainability to be positively perceived, better understood, and well implemented. It is the bridge to include the less represented voice, common people, and indigenous communities to be parts of climate and sustainability conversation; making sure to leave no one behind.


[1] Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

Continue Reading

Southeast Asia

Ecosystem Restoration: The Answer to Indonesia’s Dilemma

Published

on

The pressure for the Indonesian government to actively take part in climate change mitigation has been escalated lately. Since 2016, Indonesia has been a part of the Paris Agreement to join the global movement to tackle climate change and its negative impacts. First adopted at COP 21, the agreement demands committed countries to submit an updated national climate action plan, called Nationally Determined Contribution or NDC, on a five-year cycle. Hence, COP 26, which was held a couple of weeks ago in Glasgow, was the centre of attention to all activists and environmentalists to find out how each country’s progress has been mitigating climate issues for the past five years. President Jokowi spoke at COP 26 about Indonesia’s achievements in mitigating climate change which many Indonesian activists and environmentalists then criticized. He mentioned that Indonesia has been positively contributing to tackling climate change and that the deforestation rate in Indonesia has significantly reduced. Greenpeace criticized that all the Jokowi’s claims were not picturing the whole situation to Indonesia’s current condition. Greenpeace believed that the low rate of deforestation was not a product of policy intervention but merely from the wet season.

Just a day after COP 26 conference, the tweets from Siti Nurbaya, the Minister of Environment and Forestry, added fuel to the fire. She wrote a Twitter thread, explaining the vast development in Jokowi’s era should not be stopped only because of carbon emissions or deforestation. She also put the dilemma of the Indonesian government in achieving the net-zero carbon goal by 2030. “If the concept is no deforestation, that means there will be no roads, then how about the people, do they have to be isolated? Meanwhile the government must be present in the middle of its people”. The statement she put in her tweets was considered pro-deforestation, which contradicts her duty to contribute to Indonesia’s commitment to Net-Zero by 2060. It instantly got viral on social media. Aside from the controversy, the 2015 – 2019 National Medium Term Development Plan (RPJMN) mentioned six main national development goals: leading sector development targets, including food and energy. With monoculture food production and fossil fuel-based energy production, deforestation is inevitable, and Minister Siti’s controversial statement makes more sense and reflects the dilemma on forest management in Indonesia.

However, the urgency to create a global movement tackling climate change is because climate change is getting real. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the global temperature was 1.1 degrees Celcius above the pre-industrial period in 2019. In addition to that, the total greenhouse gas emissions, including land-use change, reached 59.1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent. It is undeniable that Indonesia also significantly contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. The Global Forest Watch summarized the tree cover loss that has been happening in Indonesia for the past ten years. For the last two decades, Indonesia lost 27.7 million hectares of tree cover and equivalent to 19 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide emissions. An article from WRI Indonesia mentioned that even though the overall deforestation rate is declining from 2015 to 2018, several provinces with an abundance of primary forest and peatland, which are East Kalimantan, Maluku, and West Papua, experienced a 43%, 40%, and 35% increase in deforestation, respectively. The impact of climate change affects the environmental and social aspects and dramatically affects the economy. In the 4th Indonesia Circular Economic Forum, the National Development Planning Agency of Indonesia or Bappenas mentioned that the economic loss due to climate change will reach 115 trillion rupiah in 2024. However, Indonesia can reduce the loss to 57 trillion rupiahs by making some efforts on mitigating climate change, Bappenas said.

The dilemma then brings up the question: how should the Indonesian government act on climate change mitigation in a way that is not threatening the continuity of national development but not stunting the growth of economic development? In 2004, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry issued an ecosystem restoration concession (ERC) regulation in the production forest area. ERC is a forest-based management model that allows the private sector to restore degraded lands and utilize non-timber products and environmental services in the production forest area. The idea behind ERC is to provide a license to investors, similar to logging and industrial forest permit, to reforest the area that the other two permit’s activities have impacted. ERC could help carbon capture scale and offset the carbon footprint from development activities if it runs well. And since private firms manage ERC, it could also positively impact the economy. Unlike NGO or non-profit organizations, the ERC scheme demands the operating company to profit through ecosystem restoration. It can be from utilizing non-timber products such as honey, bamboo, or rattan, cultivating medicinal plants, wildlife preservation, developing ecotourism, and carbon capture and sequestration.

Even though ERC is a relatively new concept and not as appealing and popular as other types of concession, some ERC companies managed to show some progress that supports Indonesia’s development plan and climate mitigation targets. The ERC of PT Rimba Makmur Utama (RMU), also known as the Katingan-Mentaya Project, focuses on carbon business to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and has sold its carbon credits to companies such as Shell, Volkswagen, and NP Paribas. By protecting and restoring the forest, RMU had Verified Carbon Units for about 4.34 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2017. A member of the APRIL group, PT Restorasi Ekosistem Riau (RER), also committed to protecting, restoring, and conserving the forest ecosystem through ERC. RER has been inventing flora and fauna, preventing forest fires, and conducting ecosystem research in its concession of 150.693 ha forest in Riau province. RER embodies APRIL’s commitment to conserving one hectare of land for every one hectare of APRIL’s pulp and paper plantation. PT Restorasi Ekosistem Indonesia (REKI), the first ERC license holder, has become a home to 1.350 species, improving local livelihood by protecting farmers’ right to land, promoting women’s rights, and preserving deforestation-free areas through its Hutan Harapan. And PT Restorasi Habitat Orangutan Indonesia (RHOI) has provided a secure habitat for more than 400 orangutans from BOS Foundation Orangutan Reintroduction program.

ERC business models typically include carbon sequestration, wildlife conservation, forest protection, utilizing non-timber forest product (NTFS), developing ecotourism, enhancing local economies, and research and development. These activities potentially support the national development plan in practice and in a strategic way. Five of the 7 Agenda in The National Medium Term Development Plan 2020-2024, which are strengthening economic resilience, reducing inequality from regional development, improving human resources, building national character and culture, and enhancing the natural environment and building climate and disaster resilience, could use ecosystem restoration concession as a strategy to achieve the sustainable development goals. Moreover, the implementation of Omnibus law can benefit investors in doing ecosystem restoration business. The current regulation issued by the Minister of Environment and Forestry, P.8/2021, allow multibusiness activities in production forest with only one permit, called PBPH. With PBPH, investors can be more flexible in choosing where to invest in ecosystem restoration. Moreover, the G20 presidency of Indonesia 2022 also forces president Jokowi to show off his capability and willingness in moving toward sustainable development. Promoting ERC and putting best practices into practice, ecosystem restoration can be the most strategic way to solve the dilemma between climate change and development.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Africa Today25 mins ago

Rights experts call for end to violence against women in Tigray conflict

Experts appointed by the UN Human Rights Council have called for urgent action to end violence against women and girls...

Human Rights2 hours ago

‘Bodyright’ campaign launched, to end rise in gender-based violence online

Corporate logos and Intellectual Property (IP) receive “greater protection online than we do as human beings”, the UN’s women’s health agency that works to end gender-based violence, UNFPA, said on Thursday, launching a new...

Africa4 hours ago

Gender Equality at the Expense of Democracy in Africa

At a first glance, the Transitional Charter released by the Comité national du rassemblement et du développement (CNRD), the junta...

Defense6 hours ago

Will India go Nuclear in the Future? – A regional overview

South Asia has not seen stability in long while. Ever since the colonial takeover by the British, it has been...

Finance8 hours ago

GCC returns to growth amid high oil prices and strong responses to COVID-19

Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) economies are expected to return to an aggregate growth rate of 2.6% in 2021, according to...

Southeast Asia10 hours ago

Vietnam’s President Phuc visit to Switzerland and Russia

Vietnam’s President Nguyen Xuan Phuc visited Switzerland and Russia(November25-December 2) to promote his country’s bilateral ties with the two countries. During the visit to...

Africa Today12 hours ago

New Project to Support the Emergence of a Digital Economy in Djibouti

The World Bank today approved a US$10 million credit from the International Development Association (IDA), the World Bank’s program for...

Trending