- Stars (0)
Arakan (Rakhine State) : A Land in Conflict on Myanmar’s Western Frontier
By Martin Smith — Transnational Institute (tni), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, December 2019
Arakan, the present-day Rakhine State, represents the post-colonial failures of Myanmar in microcosm: ethnic conflict,political impasse, militarisation, economic neglect and the marginalisation of local peoples. During the past decade, many of these challenges have gathered a new intensity, accentuating a Buddhist-Muslim divide and resulting in one of the greatest refugeecrises in the modern world. A land of undoubted human and natural resource potential, Arakan has become one of the poorest territories in the country today.
The current crisis was in no way preordained. Arakan’s vibrant history reflects its position on a strategic crossroads in Asia. Far from being a remote or forgotten land, Arakan and its peoples have long been at a centre of regional interchange, not at the periphery. Inter-community relationships, however, were badly disrupted by the intervention of colonial rule. This is a debilitating legacy that has had lasting resonance in national politics until the present day. At different turning points in history, Arakan has undergone grievous times of conflict and instability. All were moments of outside intervention and governmental change during which the rights of local peoples were marginalised and ignored. Such an era exists again today.
The current emergency is often misleadingly characterised as a “Buddhist Rakhine” versus “Muslim Rohingya” struggle for political rights and ethnic identity. But the challenges of achieving the rights of democracy and self-determination for the peoples of Arakan have always been more complex and nuanced than this. Since colonization began in the 18th century, central governments have never been independent or neutral actors. During the past two centuries, a number of very different jurisdictions have come and gone: the Konbaung dynasty, the “Pax Britannica”, the Japanese interregnum during the Second World War, and a series of military-dominated governments since Myanmar’s independence in 1948. In the 21st century, Arakan is a land that is yet to find ethnic peace and political inclusion for all its peoples.
Since 2011, hopes for reconciliation and national change have been invested in parliamentary reform and peace talks under a new system of quasicivilian democracy. These expectations accelerated with the election of the National League for Democracy (NLD) to government office in 2015. For the moment, however, the processes of reform have not been inclusive, and meaningful dialogue is yet to begin. A practice of “top-down” government still exists; communal divisions have deepened; and a culture of impunity remains unaddressed in the military field. The greater liberalism in the country during the past few years is not in doubt. But the contemporary Rakhine State has witnessed its greatest period of violence and displacement in many decades.
Critically, such experiences are not unique in the country. Conflict regression has also occurred in the Kachin and Shan States during the past few years. Such realities in these three states – Kachin, Rakhine and Shan – cannot be regarded as exceptions or secondary issues in post-colonial Myanmar. Rather, they go to the heart of the failures of the modern-day state. For the moment, the ethno-political landscape is bleak. During the past three years, a series of investigations have been underway, both in Myanmar and abroad, to try and address the causes of such deep crisis in Arakan. Some very different perspectives have emerged. To date, there is no consensus on how to engage with the challenges of Arakan nor how to take policy recommendations forward.
The 2017 Kofi Annan “Advisory Commission on Rakhine State” put forward a host of recommendations for policy reform.4 The 2018 UN “Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar” advocated that the leaders of the national armed forces, known as the Tatmadaw, be prosecuted for war crimes. A new “Independent Commission of Enquiry on Northern Rakhine”, appointed by the Myanmar government, is currently re-examining the emergency in the Bangladesh borderlands under the auspices of international advisors. And in November 2019 the International Criminal Court announced that it would open an investigation into crimes against humanity and persecution on the grounds of ethnicity or religion. Meanwhile the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accepted a case on the alleged breach of the 1948 UN Convention against Genocide.
Complicating matters further, the international community is pursuing some very different policies in the field. Western governments believe that punitive action needs to be taken against those responsible for human rights abuses. China is seeking to place Rakhine State at the centre of President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative to develop economic roads westwards to Eurasia. India is prioritising a “Kaladan Gateway” project to promote integration with Mizoram, Assam and other northeast states under Narendra Modi’s “Act East” policy. And Bangladesh, one of the poorest countries in the world, is left with the burden of over one million Rohingya refugees and the prospect of instability along its borders for many years to come.
These are all crucial issues, and how different actions play out during the next few years will have defining consequences on the political future of Myanmar. At a critical moment in national transition, Arakan is once again on the front-line in both domestic emergency and international geopolitics. After a long history of close inter-relations with the politics and cultures of India, Arakan is on the brink of one of the greatest political shifts in two centuries as Myanmar increasingly gravitates into the orbit of China. Long neglected by the outside world, Rakhine State today is one of the most scrutinised territories in international politics and diplomacy.
There is, however, one great omission in these discussions as different visions are prepared for Rakhine State’s future: the voices of the peoples of Arakan themselves. It is a mistake of historic proportions. Communities from all ethnic backgrounds are presently facing among the most challenging times in their history. But, as during previous times of national change, they are being scarcely consulted – if at all. Instead historic errors of marginalisation and exclusion are being repeated, compounding a new generation of grievance. During the past decade, ethnic conflicts and armed struggles that originally broke out at Myanmar’s independence in 1948 have sprung back into new life.
The evidence is stark. Northern Rakhine State and the tri-border region with Bangladesh and India is presently one of the most conflict-divided territories in the modern world; hostility is deep between different government and nationality organisations; over a million people – or a third of the population – are refugees in Bangladesh or displaced internally from their homes; electoral politics are highly contested in the country’s emergent democracy; and the contemporary humanitarian crisis bears comparison with the worst upheavals in Arakan’s troubled past.
Similar impasse continued in Muslim politics. Muslim politicians also performed well in elections during the parliamentary era. In the 1947, 1951 and 1956 elections, Muslim candidates won the seats for Maungdaw and Buthidaung townships, running with the support of the Jamiatul-Ulama North Arakan (and, in one case, Burma Muslim Congress). Conservative Muslims generally rejected the Mujahid recourse to armed struggle. The leading Muslim MPs, Sultan Ahmed and Abdul Gaffar, both joined efforts to convince the Mujahids to lay down their arms if they wanted their political demands to be considered. Muslim politicians, however, did not form a single party. They also rejected joining with IAPG-ANUO leaders in forming an “All Arakan” alliance to press the case for Arakan statehood. Their strategy, instead, was to advocate for the rights of the Muslim population by negotiating with different parliamentary leaders, both in government and political opposition.
Meanwhile the continuing exodus of Muslim refugees has caused deepening strains with Asian neighbours. As of mid-2019, there were 913,000 refugees in formal camps in Bangladesh and estimates of a further 200,000 living outside. Over 100,000 Rohingyas and “Myanmar Muslims” have also registered with the UNHCR in Malaysia. And this year the Indian authorities attempted to begin the deportation of 40,000 Rohingya refugees back to Myanmar amidst human rights protests. The UN Secretary-General António Guterres commented: “In my experience I have never seen a community so discriminated in the world as the Rohingyas.”
In response, both NLD and Tatmadaw leaders Rakhine State, historically known as Arakan, represents the post-colonial failures of Myanmar in microcosm: ethnic conflict, political impasse, militarisation, economic neglect and the marginalisation of local peoples. During the past decade, many of these challenges have gathered a new intensity, accentuating a Buddhist-Muslim divide and resulting in one of the greatest refugee crises in the modern world. A land of undoubted human and natural resource potential, Rakhine State has become one of the poorest territories in the country today.
The current crisis is often characterised as a “Buddhist Rakhine” versus “Muslim Rohingya” struggle for political rights and ethnic identity. But the challenges of achieving democracy, equality and the right of self-determination have always been more complex and nuanced than this. Arakan’s vibrant history reflects its frontline position on a cultural and geo-political crossroads in Asia.
Taking a narrative approach, this report seeks to analyse the challenges facing Rakhine State and its peoples during a critical time of transition from military rule. As always in Myanmar, a balanced understanding of local societies and perspectives is essential in a territory that reflects different ethnic, religious and political viewpoints. In the case of Rakhine State, the social and political challenges facing the peoples have been little documented or understood. Decades of civil war and international isolation have resulted in a dearth of reporting on the ethnic conflicts and governmental failures that have had a devastating impact on the ground. The situation is critical. While armed conflict and humanitarian suffering continue, a new “great game” is underway as the United Nations, China, India and other international actors seek to engage over Arakan’s political and economic future. It is vital that the voices of the local peoples are heard. Rakhine State should not be considered a peripheral or exceptional case of ethno-political crisis in modern-day Myanmar. The ambition must be that in the coming decade Rakhine State becomes a model for informed and progressive change. Equality and justice for Arakan’s peoples are integral to peace and stability in the country at large.
