- Stars (0)
The Rohingya Crisis: The Centrality of Identity and Citizenship
Nehginpao Kipgen — is a Political Scientist, Associate Professor , O.P. Jindal Global University, Delhi, India. Published online: 13 Feb 2019.
The article examines the recent developments of Rohingya refugee crisis, especially in the aftermath of August 2017 violence which led to the exodus of hundreds of thousands of people across the border to Bangladesh. It analyzes the three-stage-plan proposed by China and the repatriation agreement between Myanmar and Bangladesh and argues that ethnic identity and citizenship issues are fundamental to the Rohingya conundrum.
Without addressing these core issues, which thus far have been paid little or no serious consideration, there is a danger of recurrence of violence. While the Myanmar authorities are ready to address some of the immediate concerns, such as providing accommodation and food, evidences suggest that the government does not have the political will, at least at the moment, to address the core issues of ethnic identity and citizenship, as well as the related security concerns.
Identity is necessary for a state to officially recognize its people and for the international community to address issues concerning the people. There are instances where people self-identify or may like to be identified in a certain way but are coerced to accept an identity which they may find difficult to accept and or compromise with. And it is possible that there are situations where identity problem or contestation leads to tensions between groups of people or with the state.
Joane Nagel in his work Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture discusses how ethnic identity is created and recreated by individuals and groups of individuals, and argues that ethnic identity is “the result of a dialectical process involving internal and external opinions and processes, as well as the individual’s self-identification and outsiders’ ethnic designations-i.e. what you think your ethnicity is, versus what they think your ethnicity is”.
In this article, I borrow Donald L. Horowitz’s definition of ethnicity as an umbrella concept that “easily embraces groups differentiated by color, language, and religion; it covers ‘tribes,’ ‘races,’ ‘nationalities,’ and castes”. In normal circumstances, the construct of ethnic identity may be peaceful. But under certain situations, the making of identity(s) can be problematic and even lead to violence. According to Klandermans, radicalization of identity is a consequence of the state’s failure to accommodate the demands of the frustrated and marginalized groups. The state politicizes the group’s collective identity instead of accepting their demands. Under such circumstances, the group attempts but fails to influence the state, which then leads to a situation where the group’s identity is threatened by the majority group(s) or by the authorities.
And often times, citizenship is considered juxtaposed to identity. But it is important to understand that although citizenship itself implies identity it is not about any identity. Citizenship is a “distinctly political identity, one which stipulates the conditions of membership in and exclusion from a political community”.4 In other words, citizenship is not merely a category but also a membership or exclusion to the political community of a state. Being a citizen is not just about holding a birth certificate or passport issued by the state but there are also rights, benefits, duties and other responsibilities. Citizenship gives people an identity which allows them to enjoy the maximum benefits and privileges from the state, as well as obligation to certain duties and responsibilities.
The Rohingya crisis has been lingering on for several decades but the objective of this article is not to dwell into the historical aspect but rather examines the recent developments, particularly since the aftermath of the August 2017 violence which has led to the exodus of hundreds of thousands of people5 across the border to Bangladesh. It analyzes the plans to repatriate the refugees from Bangladesh to Myanmar and argues that ethnic identity and citizenship issues need to be addressed, which I consider fundamental to the Rohingya conundrum. In particular, the article examines the three-stage-plan proposed, by China and the repatriation agreement reached between Myanmar and Bangladesh and argues that while the ultimate solution lies in Myanmar, there is lack of political will, at least at the moment, from the Myanmar government to address the core issues.
As a result of the Myanmar military’s “clearance operations” in the aftermath of August 25, 2017 ARSA attacks, an estimate of over 700,000 Rohingyas have fled to neighboring Bangladesh. The question is why such large number of people had to flee their homes? Although the obvious reason was the ARSA attacks and the Myanmar security forces’ overwhelming response to the attacks, there are several other issues which have contributed to the mass exodus.
