Such a strange silence: India’s stand on the Rohingya crisis 

Such a strange silence: India’s stand on the Rohingya crisis 

Context

India’s reticence on the Rohingya crisis undermines its democracy and global standing

What has happened?

The Pope has been in South Asia this week, with the focus of his stops in Bangladesh and Myanmar on the reconciliation and rehabilitation of more than 836,000 Rohingya (including 623,000 since August, according to the UN’s International Organisation for Migration) who have fled gruesome violence in Myanmar

Multiple foreign visits

Author states that many foreign leaders have visited refugee camps in Bangladesh

• The U.S. sent Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to Myanmar
• The British and Canadian international development ministers
• Singapore’s Foreign Minister has made trips to Naypyidaw and Dhaka, exploring a role for ASEAN countries to help in the crisis
• Bangladesh Foreign Minister Abul Hassan Mahmood Ali took the European Union’s Foreign Affairs High Representative along with the German, Swedish and Japanese Foreign Ministers for a survey of the refugee camps

Has any Indian leader visited the camps?

No

China’s mediation

In a rare shift of position from not involving itself in the internal politics of another country, China decided to play a mediatory role in the issue, and its Foreign Minister went to Dhaka to meet Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina on November 18, and then to Naypyidaw to meet President HtinKyaw

• 3-phase solution: Within days, Bangladesh and Myanmar announced an agreement to begin the repatriation of Rohingya refugees back to Rakhine province in about two months, as part of what Chinese foreign minister called a three-phase solution

India: A silent neighbor

Author points out that as the subcontinent’s biggest nation and neighbour to both Bangladesh & Myanmar, as well as the country most likely to be affected if the numbers of Rohingya refugees continue to grow, India in fact should be showing the most initiative in this crisis

Blunders by India

Author states that India until now has failed to handle this issue appropriately all the while committing blunders along the way

• Refusal to acknowledge the crisis: Indian PM, during his visit to Myanmar, refused to refer to the Rohingya in his press statements in Naypyidaw in early September. Nor did India refer to anything other than the terror strike by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army while discussing the violence in Rakhine. It wasn’t until two days later, and after some prodding from Ms. Hasina, that the Indian foreign office even issued a statement of concern over the refugee crisis
• Refusal to endorse Bali declaration: In Bali, India refused to endorse a 50-nation parliamentarian conference’s declaration because it referenced the Rohingya. Every other South Asian country, including Buddhist-majority Bhutan and Sri Lanka, endorsed the Bali declaration

India: Holding back

India, which has a tradition of rushing humanitarian aid and medical assistance, doctors and volunteers to other nations — for example, after the 2004 tsunami, the 2008 Cyclone Nargis that hit Myanmar, and the 2015 Nepal earthquake — has been seen to visibly hold back during the Rohingya crisis

Position at UN: Allowing other countries to take lead
At the UN too, India’s voice has been consistently muted, ceding space to other countries to take the lead on the issue

• The U.K., for example, hosted a meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly with Myanmar’s National Security Adviser and Bangladesh’s Foreign Minister, attended by senior officials from Indonesia, Turkey, Australia, Canada, Sweden, Denmark and the U.S
• Abstention by India: At the UNGA’s Third Committee vote, India abstained on a resolution calling for an end to military action, one of 26 abstentions on the proposal to send a UN fact-finding mission to Myanmar — 135 countries voted in favour of the resolution. While India’s vote is consistent with its position on interventionist resolutions, it doesn’t mark itself out for principled leadership of any kind. If anything, the votes have had a bearing on India’s standing in Bangladesh, one of its closest allies in the region, whose leadership is struggling to cope with the flow of refugees as Ms. Hasina braces for a tough election next year

The Impact

All of India’s actions since the outbreak of this round of violence in Myanmar have negated its position as a regional, subcontinental and Asian leader

What should be done now?

• Put concerns about repatriation on hold: Firstly the impression that the government’s decision to push out nearly 40,000 Rohingya living in India since 2012 is guided by its domestic political compulsions is not conducive to India’s international ambitions. Therefore, it may be necessary for India to put its own concerns about repatriation on hold until it is able to work with both Bangladesh and Myanmar on the issue, preferably in a trilateral format. This should have been easier for India than for China, given it already works with them on regional issues as a part of BIMSTEC
• Proper refugee policy: Even though it is not a signatory to any UN refugee convention, India has a proud tradition of giving a home to neighbors in distress:
  • from Tibetans in 1960s to East Pakistanis in the 1970s, from Sri Lankans in the 1980s to the Afghans in the 1990s
  • More recently, the Indian government even changed its long-term visa rules to help minorities fleeing violence from neighbouring Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan

If India now says it cannot help Rohingya, who are a minority in Myanmar, it is either saying that Rohingya are not Myanmarese or that Myanmar is not a neighbour, both of which contradict previous positions. India also has a unique position as a country that is home to every religion practised in the region and must play to this strength

Conclusion

India, which has high stakes in global and regional governance, must ensure its voice is heard on the Rohingya crisis. Mumbling as part of a chorus while one of the biggest human tragedies is unfolding across two of India’s borders does not suit a nation with global leadership aspirations