Rohingyas recount terror of Burma clashesVishal sent me this story. I'll share his summary of the matter since he seems to get at the heart of it:
I found an interesting article about Bangladesh's policy towards the predominantly Muslim Rohingya people, who were being terrorized by Buddhist nationalists in Myanmar. Many Rohingya families illegally entered Bangladesh and settled in refugee camps, but Bangladesh refused to help them and has sent thousands back to Myanmar. Although this is a huge human rights violation, Bangladesh is battling its own problems. It's interesting to consider whether Bangladesh's actions are justified or not. Both IGOs and NGOs are trying to be involved, namely the UNHCR and Human Rights Watch, but Bangladesh refuses to give them any support.It seems there's no shortage of humanitarian crises nowadays, but perhaps that's just because we're aware of them and we care more than we used to--or maybe there are in fact more humanitarian crises.
This story actually touches on several concepts that we've discussed in the course. Can you think of a few?
Domestic sovereignty would be a start- a state's control over its own population. As a state, I suppose Bangladesh has the right to reject the Rohingya families who ILLEGALLY entered into its territory. But as Vishal stated, to reject these people who have been terrorized in their original state and force them back into that dangerous arena is truly a human rights violation; people have the right to life, liberty, property and with that a guarantee of safety. I hope the IGOs/NGOs can arrange a settlement of sorts that persuades Bangladesh to be willing to help the Rohingya people out.
ReplyDeleteI guess this might count as transnational crime but I am not sure, because it is not the crime that is spreading but its consequences. F or this reason I believe that IGOs and NGOs should get involved, but I agree to an extent with Bangladesh because if the flood of refugees could hurt their economy or security then it is important to put their national interests and security first. However, it might help if they supported the UNHRC and Human Rights Watch, because it may be able to help the Rohingyas and solve the problem, which would stop the flood of refugees and give Bangladesh what it wants.
ReplyDelete-Feddi Roth
Issues like this make me wonder how much compassion humans have for each other. Do we help people because we have to or do we help people because we want to? I was also surprised to find out that Buddhists could be so violent. I always thought of them as very peaceful, but I guess there are extremists in every religion. This story definitely relates to how IGOs and NGOs can affect domestic affairs domestically more easily than other actual states. This also covers Westphalian sovereignty and giving states the right to make their own domestic policy. Technically, regardless of it is morally right or wrong, Bangladesh has the right to reject these refugees. That is one of the flaws of modern sovereignty. Overall, as inhumane as this seems, it is perfectly legal. Hopefully, one of the IGOs or NGOs can convince them to think differently.
ReplyDeleteCompassion is really irrelevant in the international world. Bangladesh has an obligation to its own people first, before helping others. If their government doesn't think that they can handle the refugees, then we shouldn't force them into their country. There is nothing inhumane about this. Should they allow their own weak and poor die, while saving those who have no loyalty to Bangladesh? This is a Burmese issue, and it should remain that way. Burma should keep their own people under control. The Rohingya can seek help from IGOs and NGOs, but it is the decision of the IGOs/NGOs themselves as to whether or not they should intervene. If they don't, then just leave it to the Burmese government.
ReplyDeleteoh and for the record: I do not support genocide
DeleteThanks for the clarification.
DeleteNo problem
DeleteAll right, Simon, I see where you're coming from when you say that it's only the responsibility of Myanmar to keep control of its citizens. However, when you look at previous civil rights abuses conducted by a state's own government, such as the Rwandan genocide, it becomes a bit ridiculous to say that only Myanmar should have sovereignty over its people. Clearly, Myanmar cannot take care of its people----that's why the Roshingya are running from its own military. Just try looking at what happened with Rwanda, for example: the UN and other states were incredibly reluctant to even attempt to mitigate the human rights abuses, so 800,000 people were murdered and 250,000-500,000 people were raped or sexually mutilated. The UN itself has called its and the international community's response a failure. Perhaps we shouldn't let that happen again, eh?
DeleteGenocide may be bad, but there could be even worse consequences from letting this get out of hand. Allowing further more refugees to escape into Bangladesh has only increased drug trafficking, human trafficking and overall hurt their internal stability - potentially putting the stability of the entire region at risk. With India and Pakistan so close, as well as Chinese and Vietnamese disputes over the South China Sea, this instability could easily escalate to a full scale conflict. This kind of "war" would make a some civil rights violations seem insignificant. Rather than forcing neighboring nations to counter Burmese problems, let them resolve their own problems. Rwanda was a completely different case, where the Tutsis had control prior to the Hutu takeover. The Muslims in Burma have never had that luxury, and the Burmese police have no incentive to "rape" or "sexually mutilate" anyone. IGOs and NGOs, as well as other states, can make their own decisions as to what they want to do about Burma. Good try Sophie, this is completely different from Rwanda.
DeleteSimon has a point - Bangladesh is not obligated to accept the Rohingyas. If it hurts its economy, and indeed it is doing so, Bangladesh can deport them. The refugees, however, do not have access to humanitarian aid in Myanmar itself, so they do not have a choice. Myanmar is not likely to accept aid either as long as it is under the rule of Thein Sein. It then becomes a question of whether Bangladesh is willing to hurt its livelihood to solve a humanitarian crisis that no other country cares about. IGOs and NGOs cannot "make their own decisions as to what they want to do" because they need Bangladesh to agree to establishing refugee camps in their territory and to leave the existing camps alone. The impact of refugees is lowered with the formal creation of refugee camps, anyways.
DeletePsssh. The increase in drug and human trafficking is only alleged and not supported by any evidence. Your "stability" argument is completely flawed---why would either Bangladesh or Myanmar want to go to war? Myanmar doesn't even want the Roshingya people; that's why they're being massacred. So why would the Burmese government ever want to fight a war to keep them? I am not forcing Bangladesh to take care of the Roshingya people, rather countering your argument that they should full-out reject them. On to the Rwanda argument: who cares if the Tutsis had control before? They were still systematically murdered in the hundreds of thousands. Your warrant is way too weak here. And as for your argument about how Burmese police won't rape---they already have. http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,16123412,00.html
DeleteI don't think you understand what I'm saying about stability. Instability means that they don't have control - so even if they don't want it, war would happen as a result of the chaos from a collapsing Bangladesh. If you really want to compare this to Rwanda: when the refugees fled to Zaire, that clearly destabilized and corrupted the country. This did not resolve any of the Rwandan conflict, but only allowed it to continue and escalate. Rather than drag the rest of Asia into this, we should just leave Myanmar to fix it's own problems. If this really turns into a genocide or "ethnic cleansing" then the appropriate IGOs and NGOs will get involved. No need to bring any other states into this.
DeleteIt is incredible how rigid some people might be from my perspective for International Relations. As human beings, I believe that we need to have compassion for every individual, after all this could have happened to any of us. As Jeremy said, this is a perfect example of how states can have their own domestic policy. I believe that specially NGOs need to get involved in the issue as soon as possible before it becomes a bigger problem...-Ces
ReplyDeleteThis issue has to deal with the effect of NGOs. It is show that Burma/Myanmar is having problems with controlling the problems of their domestic NGOs. When NGOs are able to drive out groups of people a problem has definitely gotten out of hand. It is a problem that the government of Burma/Myanmar should handle on its own. This is a humanitarian issue and an intra-state conflict. Even though, I do condemn the country of Bangladesh for not providing a place of refuge for these persecuted people, I do agree that this is a issue of Burma/Myanmar, not a Bangladesh issue.
ReplyDelete