By Subir Bhaumik Sep 20, 2022
If Sheikh Hasina was Modi, she would revel in the opportunity provided by the border conflict and use a moderately successful military response for electoral purposes. By instinct, she is a cautious leader and avoids any reckless action, usually valuing diplomacy over military action.
Thrice so far in September, Bangladesh’s Ministry of foreign Affairs (MOFA) has summoned the Myanmar ambassador in Dhaka and lodged a “strong protest over firing of mortar shells, aerial firings and airspace violations from Myanmar, causing death and injuries to the people inside Bangladesh territory.”
The Myanmar ambassador acknowledged the firing of multiple mortar shells into Bangladesh territory but claimed that it is their insurgent groups that were firing heavy artillery and mortars, some of which landed inside Bangladesh territory. MOFA handouts said Bangladesh maintained a policy of zero tolerance towards terrorists and insurgents and none were sheltered in its territory and strongly advocated restraint by Myanmarese troops because the shelling on Bangladesh border region was “creating an atmosphere of fear and panic”.
The Myanmar envoy was also reminded that the ongoing situation was detrimental to kickstarting the repatriation process of the ‘forcibly displaced Myanmar nationals’, temporarily sheltered in Bangladesh on humanitarian grounds, the MOFA handout read.
That is where the catch really lies. The shelling of Bangladesh border villages that has left two dead and scores of others injured comes at a time when Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has started to strongly raise the issue of repatriation of one million Rohingya refugees back to Myanmar.
Many in Bangladesh policy circles refuse to buy the Myanmar envoy’s statement, holding the Arakanese insurgents responsible for shelling the border villages. While it is true that fresh fighting has erupted in Myanmar’s Rakhine state after the Arakan Army (AA) reneged on its tenuous ceasefire with the Myanmarese military, neither the AA nor the Rohingya rebel group Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) are known to use heavy artillery in combat. Surely, they also do not use combat aircraft and military helicopters which have intruded Bangladesh airspace.
And, since the entire northern Rakhine border region with Bangladesh is primarily populated by Muslim Rohingyas and neither the AA nor the ARSA has been active in these areas in recent weeks, it is inconceivable that the shelling of Bangladesh border villages is a spillover of fighting within Myanmar.
The heaviest fighting between the AA and the Tatmadaw (Myanmarese military) has been reported in Chin state (Paletwa region) and in other parts of Rakhine state far away from the Bangladesh border. This has actually led to a fresh spurt of refugees, mostly Chin tribespeople, entering Mizoram.
While the Indian government is for closing the border and taking no more Myanmarese refugees, the Mizoram government headed by former rebel leader and now Chief Minister Zoramthanga is sympathetic to the Chins (ethnic cousins of Mizos) and appears keen to shelter them from Myanmarese military atrocities.
Thirty thousand refugees from Myanmar are already in Mizoram, including many lawmakers and officials, and even military deserters. No such fresh influx has been reported on the Myanmar-Bangladesh border. So, while the Myanmarese military would blame the insurgents for the shelling of Bangladesh border villages and argue that fighting between troops and insurgents can spill over the border, there are no takers for that in Bangladesh.
Bangladesh diplomats think that the border tensions are worked by the Myanmarese military to throw cold water on Dhaka’s renewed efforts to get the repatriation of Rohingya refugees started.
India’s position
Hasina, during her recent visit to Delhi, sought Indian support to pressurise Myanmar to kickstart the repatriation process. India has very little clout over the Myanmarese generals to push such an agenda because Delhi is unduly defensive in its Myanmar policy, imagining any strong move viewed as unfriendly by the generals will further push it into a tighter Chinese embrace.
This understanding is flawed because the Myanmarese junta is already firmly in the Chinese pocket and cannot withstand global pressure for democratisation without Beijing’s support. Delhi needs to strongly support the National Unity Government (NUG) and pitch for a comprehensive dialogue involving the NUG, the military junta and other stakeholders like ethnic rebel groups for a return to democracy in a time-bound schedule rather than just leave it to the ASEAN to carry forward what it has so far failed to achieve. But that is a separate issue.
Hasina’s real hope to get the Rohingya repatriation process started lies in her ability to influence Beijing to pressurise the Myanmarese generals. Bangladesh tries to balance its relations with India and China, the West and the ASEAN but if Beijing fails to deliver on Dhaka’s concerns over the Rohingya repatriation, it is time Bangladesh reviews its China policy.
Rohingya issue in UN
Hasina strongly raising the Rohingya issue in the UN will only make sense if her government is willing to go far enough and ask for UN intervention to get the Rohingya repatriation issue started and managed. The UN has so far lectured Bangladesh on its humanitarian responsibilities to shelter the Rohingyas, even criticising Hasina’s efforts to move many of them to the remote Bhasan Char islands.
The time has come to tell the UN it has no moral right to lecture Bangladesh unless it can push the Myanmar junta to start taking back the Rohingyas and rehabilitating them.
Bangladesh is a poor country, just about graduating from the Least Developed Countries (LDC) and its stunning economic growth appears to have run into severe global headwinds following the Ukraine War. It is asking for IMF support and from other multilateral organisations. So, it is time for the world, especially the sermonising West, to stop pushing Bangladesh to shoulder the burden of one million Rohingyas. They are Myanmar’s own people, not “illegal Bengalis”, as the junta wants the world to believe, and they have not only to be taken back but their citizenship restored and all forms of ethnic cleansing so far attempted by the Myanmarese military stopped.
Bangladesh has so far been extremely restrained on the border. If it calls for an UN-administered repatriation process of the Rohingyas, it might find takers in the West and the move will surely rattle the Chinese. It is only after Myanmarese insurgents of the PDF started attacking Chinese interests in Myanmar that Beijing consider approaching the NUG.
Hasina in Mrs Gandhi’s position
Hasina is today caught in a situation much akin to the one faced by the late Indira Gandhi in 1971, when a much poorer India was forced to shoulder the burden of 10 million plus Bengali refugees from East Pakistan following Yayha Khan’s genocidal campaign to crush the liberation movement.
It is now known that Mrs Gandhi considered war with Pakistan as early as May 1971 to get rid of the huge refugee burden. But the Indian army wanted time until winter closed the Himalayan passes to prevent possible Chinese military intervention. General Maneckshaw also did not want to get his troops to fight in the monsoon of East Bengal. So, the war had to wait until December 1971 but only a successful outcome of the war settled the refugee problem.
Hasina does not have the military and economic strength to start a war and ask her army to march into North Rakhine, take control of the Rohingya homelands and rehabilitate the one million refugees living in her country.
But with parliament elections in Bangladesh just about a year away, Hasina can ill afford to be seen as a weak indecisive leader, especially when the country’s Islamist Opposition has openly refused to join the polls and called for an all-out agitation to oust her government. The pressure is growing on Hasina to consider a military riposte to Myanmarese provocations on the border.
Her critics are already blaming her for not doing that, talking of the late military ruler General Ziaur Rahman’s tough response in 1978 when the Rohingya issue first escalated. It is a different story that Zia’s ‘tough response’ only provoked Myanmarese military ruler Gen Ne Win to initiate “Operation Ngamin” (King Dragon), which led to denial of citizenship to tens of thousands of Rohingyas and turned them into nobody’s people in a no man’s land.
If Hasina was Modi, she would revel in the opportunity provided by the border conflict and use a moderately successful military response for electoral purposes. By instinct, she is a cautious leader and avoids any reckless action, usually valuing diplomacy over military action. But after five years of failed efforts to get the Rohingya repatriation started, her patience may clearly be running out.
(Subir Bhaumik is a former BBC correspondent and author)