The Rohingya refugee crisis: political and humanitarian perspectives

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to examine the prevailing Rohingya refugee crisis from political and humanitarian perspectives and explores the political and humanitarian aspects of the Rohingya refugee crisis.

Design/methodology/approach

Relevant literature has been reviewed for conceptual understanding. This study is descriptive and qualitative in nature and based on secondary sources of data.

Findings

The main causes of the Rohingya crisis such as political and humanitarian aspects. Issues such as discrimination and homelessness, and national security concerns that regional politics scapegoated the Rohingya to exacerbate regional tensions. Moreover, armed conflicts, political radicalization, security concerns, human rights violations and low media attention compared to other displaced families have made the future of the Rohingyas very uncertain.

Practical implications

The Rohingya crisis has far-reaching implications for domestic and regional politics as well as for relations with major world powers. In the context of regional security and geopolitics, this study provides insight into the polarization and politicization of the Rohingya minority.

Originality/value

This research offers a vital exploration of the Rohingya refugee crisis, delving into its multifaceted political and humanitarian dimensions, contributing fresh insights to address a pressing global concern.

Citation

Md Shahin, K. and Hasan, M. (2023), "The Rohingya refugee crisis: political and humanitarian perspectives", Southeast Asia: A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 151-161. https://doi.org/10.1108/SEAMJ-05-2023-0041

Introduction

The Rohingya are a Muslim ethnic group native to western Myanmar. Because of their unique language, culture and religion, the Burmese government does not recognize them as fully integrated into the Burmese population. For this reason, they have been subject to centuries of prejudice, violence and religious abuse. Burmese territory began in 1824 from the British occupation. When Myanmar became part of the British India, many historical events contributed to the current situation (Lewis, 2019). During colonial times, the border that now separates Bangladesh and Myanmar was simply a boundary. British authorities often allowed populations to across the border to meet their labor needs. Since Myanmar’s separation from British India in 1937, the border between the two countries has been permeable. Majority of Rohingya lived in the coastal region of Rakhine. That is why borders have never been formally established. Although the Muslim minority in Rakhine is a significant portion of the population, they were denied as legal citizen after Myanmar declared independence in 1948. So, one of the main arguments for Myanmar’s continued refusal to grant citizenship to the Rohingya is that they are not a recognized minority because they were not in the country before 1824 (Lewis, 2019).

In addition, the Rohingya are persecuted in Rakhine State because they are religiously Muslim ethnic minority. They are also considered illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. This is where the first friction between the Muslim minority and the Buddhist majority occurs (Ullah, 2011). In 2012, for example, Buddhist extremists attack Rohingya homes and businesses in Rakhine State in retaliation for an alleged attack on a local woman, resulting in the deaths of thousands and the displacement of hundreds of thousands. Attacks by Rohingya extremists in 2017 triggered a regional catastrophe. Since then, the Myanmar military has murdered, raped and otherwise subjected tens of thousands of Rohingya to atrocities.

Moreover, the people and government of Bangladesh publicly expressed their support for the Rohingya migrants by providing them with food, clothing, shelter, medical care and other necessities. Once the first evacuees arrived in late August 2017, aid arrived quickly. The scale of the migration triggered an immediate response on the Bangladeshi side of the border, with massive private donations of food, money and shelter. Several companies in the region coordinated the delivery of food and clothing to survivors but many is still suffering.  In the weeks following the refugees’ arrival, numerous charitable individuals and groups came forward. and quickly spread the residents’ willingness to help. Border residents and other Bangladeshis were eager to help the Rohingya. Though it did not take long for people from all over the country to make their way to Cox’s Bazar, some of them rented trucks with food and other supplies to distribute locally. It took weeks for the government to take action to restore order (Ansar, 2021).

As a quick response, senior military officials reportedly urged Prime Minister of Bangladesh to take action to prevent the situation. After gaining control, the army prepared land, constructed facilities and established a rescue system. The Prime Minister then took the problem into her own hands although it was unclear whether her cabinet agreed with her. Her famous statement, “We will eat one meal a day and share the rest with them,” illustrates her altruistic nature (The Independent, October 7, 2017).

While Bangladesh continues to engage in diplomatic negotiations, conduct human rights assessments and take concrete action for accountability and justice with global support from the United Nations, little progress has been made in creating the conditions necessary for safe, dignified and long-term return (Ansar, 2020). Research on Rohingya refugees is critical at this time to understand the ongoing challenges they face, including issues related to displacement, human rights abuses and access to basic services. This research may inform policies and interventions that address the specific needs of Rohingya refugees, promote their well-being and support their resettlement issues.

The objective of this paper is to examine the causes and consequences of the Rohingya refugee crisis from two aspects such as political and humanitarian aspects. Issues such as discrimination and homelessness, national security concerns and legal protection have been analyzed from humanitarian aspects. Under the political aspect, issues such as political gain, political radicalization, security crisis and religious extremism have been discussed.

Research methodology

This study is descriptive and qualitative in nature and based on secondary data sources. Most of the information used comes from journal articles, published documents, books, newspaper reports and online sources. The qualitative methods used to collect data on the views of host communities underpin the narratives and findings presented in this study. A total of 200 (two hundreds) respondents of varied age ranges, occupations and socioeconomic backgrounds participated in the study. We used semi-structured interviews and participant observation to understand the range of opinions held by local populations. Interviews were conducted by researchers in the native language of the interviewees with near-native fluency in the language. Questions aimed to learn more about residents’ personal experiences on the political and humanitarian aspects on their lives. Through the use of pseudonyms, the identities of the interviewees have been concealed.

Underlying theoretical standpoints

The international community and development partners are exerting pressure on the government to do something about this refugee crisis. They are straining local resources and threatening the security of countries hosting refugees. Without a solid timetable or long-term solution for the repatriation process, the situation in the region could continue to deteriorate. However, there is no sign of abating conflict, violence, or human rights abuses in Myanmar (Shukri, 2021; Alam, Guler, & Hasan, 2016). Aggression against religious ethnic groups led to a dramatic increase in the number of stateless people who have been forcibly displaced. They were unable to defend their rights and their nationality has been called into question, even though under international law everyone has the ability to assert their nationality and national security (Anupama, 2017).

The International Convention has given a clear definition of the term “refugee” since 1951. Although the word “refugee” is used frequently today, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees limit its meaning to “a person who has been forcibly removed from his or her home and is unable to return voluntarily because of persecution” (Hossain, 2022, pp. 167-177). It also states that a refugee is anyone who, by reason of race, religion, nationality or member of a particular social group from outside of the country (Hossain, 2022). The International Refugee Organization (IRO) was established in 1947 to deal with refugee problems in Europe, which is when the international community first started talking about refugees (Yesmin, 2016). On December 14, 1950, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Charter of the UNHCR, which replaced the International Relief Organization (IRO) (Feller, 2001).

Liberal thinkers believe that a host country’s refugee policy should be guided by what is best for its people. They focus on how the international regime influences refugee security policy and development. International and regional instruments like laws, conventions, and protocols safeguard the refugees. It is based on the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. According to the Refugee Convention, a refugee is “any person who, owing to his race, creed, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, has a well-founded fear of being persecuted,” whether or not he is actually fleeing his own country (Ashraf, 2021, pp. 184-206).

On the other hand, liberals emphasize the UNHCR’s role in creating a strong protection mission and fostering an organizational culture of collaboration with partners and stakeholders. Humanitarian situation, according to Hilhorst and Jansen (2010), is an arena in which many players attempt to shape the context of humanitarian action for their own purposes. It is also important to contextualize the concept of local aid or ordinary humanitarianism of the Rohingya people lived in Bangladesh.

Humanitarian aspects

The Rohingya crisis is a humanitarian disaster, resulting in millions of refugees. Thus, the ideals of refugee protection and UNHCR’s actions derived from the 1951 Refugee Convention are coming to fruition. In this regard, UNHCR is the first and foremost protection organization among the other national and international organizations in the world. Everything they do is premised on a commitment to provide security for those who truly need help and security based on claims (Gorlick, 2019). UNHCR’s protection policy has made it an effective guardian of principles through which it can achieve its goals of upholding human dignity, constitutional protection of refugees and access to asylum. Thus, from a humanitarian perspective, a number of national and international agencies work to ensure peace and security in cooperation with UNHCR’s strategic objectives and operational practices.

Discrimination and homelessness

Discrimination and homelessness are the two forms of humanitarian disaster for the Rohingya Muslim minority in Myanmar. The study shows that about one-third of the population of Myanmar’s Rakhine State is made up of the Rohingya Muslim minority. The poverty rate in Rakhine State is significantly higher than the national average (Syahrin, 2018), making it the least developed region in Myanmar. The Myanmar government has enacted and rigorously enforced several discriminatory laws against the Rohingya. Since the late 1970s, hundreds of thousands of Rohingya have migrated to neighboring Bangladesh due to the Myanmar government’s discriminatory policies. In 1982, the Burmese military regime revoked the citizenship of the Rohingyas, claiming they were not indigenous to the country. They are even not listed as one of Burma’s 135 recognized ethnic groups because the Burmese government considers them illegal immigrants who entered the country from Bangladesh decades ago and have never left (Anupama, 2017).

In line with Myanmar’s legal framework, successive governments have discriminated against the Rohingya for decades. The period of discrimination lasted until Burma's 1982 Citizenship Act, and they were also ineligible for citizenship under the British Commonwealth Citizenship Act of 1948. After Burma’s independence, the military dictator General Ne Win, in his capacity as head of the government, declared them illegal immigrants. In addition, the 1974 Constitution and Immigration Law, newly amended by the military government, also stripped them of their citizenship. Importantly, the 1982 Citizenship Law also did not classify them as members of an ethnic race (Mohsin, 2020).

Many historians claim that the Rohingya have lived peacefully in Rakhine since at least 1430, when the Rakhine king Narameikhla ruled over a population of about 30,000 Muslim fighters. But they were rendered stateless. Despite continued non-recognition by the Myanmar government, the international community and development partners have not made sustained efforts to resolve the issues of citizenship and ethnic identification of the Rohingya (Mohsin, 2020). However, recent brutal attacks by the army and migration to Bangladesh after August 2017 have caused even greater problems. The Myanmar military claims that the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) has killed over a hundred civilians and security forces. As a result of the violence between the ARSA and the military, the Rohingya are seeking political asylum (Louie Albert et al., 2020). Thus, the Rohingya have long been discriminated against and are now a stateless ethnic group in the world.

Security concern

National security is always of great importance in refugee policy. The host country is a strategic actor weighing the pros and cons of different refugee policies. Large numbers of asylum seekers pose a real or perceived security risk, which in turn influences the refugee policies of host countries. National security is a major concern for intelligence and security agencies in developing refugee policies. This is because it could lead to the closure of international borders to new arrivals and a greater focus on deportation or resettlement of refugees (Wolf, 2017). Many studies show that after September 11, 2011, refugee policies in Australia, Europe and North America prioritized national security over refugee safety in response to growing anti-immigrant sentiment. For example, Australia established offshore detention centers to influence public opinion, and the Brexit campaign portrayed immigration as a burden on the United Kingdom. The United States (US) government also took matters into its own hands, deploying the National Guard to stem the flow of migrants and refugees. However, attitudes toward immigrants and refugees were longstanding (Wolf, 2017).

There was a 1996 study by Jacobsen on national security concerns due to the influx of refugees from outside the country. He stated that the first cause of security concern is military aggression from outside the country. The second reason is whether or not the government can prevent internal conflict. The third reason is whether or not the needs of the population and the country's natural resources can be balanced. When Jacobsen speaks of resource endowments, he means livelihoods, water, and shelter. Using southern Africa as an example, Jacobsen concludes that “an influx of refugees can threaten all the multiple security parameters of a host country” by either creating new security risks or exacerbating existing ones (Jacobsen, 1996). In addition, refugee fighters, host state representatives or related parties may resort to militarizing camps, which could provoke an attack by the host state. However, refugee involvement in shelter or violent conflict with local communities, as well as refugee involvement in organized crime and terrorism, can cause disruption and generate public protests that pose a threat to security. Conflict, terrorism and other forms of coordinated violence can deplete already scarce resources, devastating local communities.

In support of national security, the Kenyan government's refugee policy includes entry bans, restrictions on movement in refugee centers and even deportation. The same way Pakistan treats Afghan refugees and Thailand treats Cambodian refugees are clear examples of restrictive refugee policies (Wolf, 2017). In these countries, refugees are forced to live in isolated camps, cut off from the local communities that host them. However, the best policy for any country hosting refugees is to send them home. However, host governments want to repatriate migrants in an orderly manner, so they take measures to keep them in camps and prevent them from leaving refugee settlements. It is believed that repatriation helps to reduce tensions between refugees and host communities and reduces pressure on resources and the environment. If repatriation is delayed or the possibility of return is uncertain, refugees may be relocated from their current camps or temporary facilities to newly developed areas to address security concerns (Momem, 2021). When existing refugee camps are overcrowded and large refugee settlements are located in areas with tourism appeal and economic potential, this sets the stage for host governments to develop plans to resettle refugees.

Political aspects

Political gain

Affected interest groups are engaged to achieve their political goals. For this reason, corruption flourishes in refugee shelters and strains the country’s infrastructure. For example, local politicians are involved in facilitating the illegal camps, receiving money to move freely or facilitating their official access to other services. These situations have had a negative impact on Bangladesh’s political culture. However, the incumbent regime and opposition parties in Bangladesh have been trying to influence the situation in their favor since the country’s independence (Momen & Hossain, 2020). The current government and its supporters want to prevent their rivals from gaining advantages. However, with the help of local government officials, local politicians tried to use the refugee crisis to their electoral advantage (Hasan, 2016). Refugee votes are a coveted target for local political parties and their respective leaders. Consequently, migrants can now obtain national ID cards, cell phones, birth certificates and even Bangladeshi passports with the help of political authorities (Masud-Un-Nabi, 2021). There is evidence of criminal activity related to the registration of refugees on voter rolls (Hasan, Jahan, & Alam, 2016). Despite regular special committees and proactive reviews and updates by the Election Commission, thousands of IDPs (The Department of Immigration and Passports) remain on Bangladesh’s voter rolls (Hasan, 2017). Thus, the incumbent government derives more political benefit from the elections than the opposition.

Political radicalization

Radicals can exploit the refugee crisis for their own purposes. This is because this crisis cannot be viewed only as a political or humanitarian crisis, but must be analyzed in the context of global security, which can reveal the threat posed by revolutionary Islamist groups. In the 1940s, when the first Rohingya militant organizations emerged, the Rohingya fought for the British colonial government against Burmese rebels who were trying to overthrow the British colonial government (Islam, Chowdhury, Hoque, & Jahan, 2022). Myanmar ceased to be a member of the “Union of Burma” in 1948 and became an independent nation. After that, a new jihadist terrorist organization emerged in the 1950s, which was eventually eradicated by Burmese security forces (Singh, 2017). The armed conflict between Rohingya Muslims and Rakhine Buddhists gained particular momentum with the formation of the Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) in the early 1980s after decades of local warfare led by the Burma Army. Their stated goals included creating an independent Rakhine state for Rohingya Muslims and preventing future attacks on Muslims by Rakhine Buddhists and the central army (Brennan and O’ Hara, 2015). To achieve its stated goals, the RSO occasionally carries out low-profile attacks on Burmese security personnel. However, Bangladeshi security authorities have begun to crack down on RSO activities near the country’s borders.

In addition, the Rakhine State Organization (RSO) was not well known among the Rohingya. This made the program ineffective in the late 1990s. As a result, their armed campaign for a Muslim Rohingya state did not pose a significant threat to Myanmar’s internal security in the 1980s and 1990s (Wolf, 2017). However, in October 2016, a radical change was observed among the fighters that contrasted with the RSO’s earlier attacks. The new fighters had military training, so their attacks were well planned and coordinated. Due in part to this new form of organized activism, the Rakhine Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) was formed (Ullah & Chattoraj, 2018). The Myanmar Anti-Terrorism Central Committee classified the ARSA as a terrorist organization in 2017 due to its position as a militant group in Rakhine State. In August 2017, the Burmese military conducted an extensive search for ARSA members. Numerous Rohingya fled their homes after they were burned down and their residents massacred in an effort to locate ARSA members. Islamic extremist organizations are believed to have ties to and financially support ARSA. Afghan Islamic extremists’ moral support for the Rohingya armed struggle against the Burmese government has also increased after the collapse of the Soviet Union (Singh, 2017). Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency is suspected of supporting ARSA in its armed struggle to maintain contact with international terrorist organizations (Wolf, 2017).

The International Crisis Group found that some ARSA members may have received weapons training in Pakistan and Arab countries (ISIS). Abdus Qadoos Burmi, the commander of the Islamic Rakhine Jihad Organization, is also believed to be of Rohingya descent. He contributed to ARSA activism by teaching in Bangladeshi refugee camps and recruiting new members in Pakistan. Maintaining an extensive transnational regional network of radical Islamist organizations is a key component of its strategy. Through its advocacy of a jihadist movement in Myanmar, al Qaeda has also shown a strong interest in promoting ARSA radicalization. Following the establishment of its new South Asian branch, Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS), the terrorist group targeted areas in Myanmar’s Rakhine State for their alleged support of a moderate government (Singh, 2017).

AQIS leader Asim Umar’s reference to the “jihad caravan” suggests that the group intends to expand its activities throughout South Asia. According to him, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic State (AQIS) could launch an operation in Pakistan, cross India and then penetrate Bangladesh and Myanmar. According to Wolf (2017), AQIS's mission is to support persecuted Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine State in Myanmar. They have also allowed former Rohingya to radicalize, which could lead to an extended civil war. The plight of refugees provides extremist groups with religious backgrounds the opportunity to recruit new members and spread their ideology. In short, the refugee crisis raises concerns about the spread of regional militancy to other countries (Ullah & Chattoraj, 2023). On the other hand, migrants may be influenced by their suffering to support extremist organizations such as ARSA or another regional radical Islamist group. The Chittagong-based Bangladeshi Islamic Movement, led by Hefazat-e-Islam, is another organization that has called for a jihadist movement in support of refugees seeking an independent Rakhine state. This group reportedly has 25,000 madrasas (religious institutions). In September 2017, the Islamist movement protested brutality against the Rohingya Muslim minority (Martin, Margesson, & Vaughn, 2018). However, refugees and their stories have been shown to sympathize with radical Muslims in Bangladesh, making them easy recruitment targets for extremists. Thus, political radicalization has some influence on this refugee crisis.

The security crisis

After the end of the Cold War, international relations and foreign policy experts offered a new perspective on security issues. According to Edwards (2008), many new security challenges emerged in the 1990s, and sovereignty over territory, national security and military power are no longer considered global issues. McGahan (2009) applies the security lens, claiming that it provides a lens through which to illuminate specific actors and the process of analyzing immigration policy, particularly how social threats are constructed and averted. Moreover, he notes that ordinary citizens are often implicated in the routines that shape the securitization of immigrants and contribute to a pervasive culture of fear. He is interested in the policies of host countries regarding refugee and immigrant security. The treatment of refugees, particularly in relation to security, has been associated with their securitization. Moreover, there are divergent views among policymakers and the media about how refugees should be viewed and what security threats they pose to host countries.

However, Mogire (2011) poses six questions about the security rhetoric surrounding the refugee crisis. He adds that the fierce competition between refugees and locals for land, water, medical care and timber is discussed. In addition, environmental damage caused by migrants, such as deforestation and pollution, can exacerbate tensions with host communities. In addition, the authors note that competition in the labor market can lead to tensions. Another potential source of conflict is the decision of refugees to participate in local political or ethnic affairs in their host country. The belief by some members of the host society that development partners or international organizations give preferential treatment to refugees is another source of conflict. Last but not least, tensions arise when the local population and the displaced do not recognize each other’s cultural heritage. In the theory of securitization, refugees are classified as a security threat based on various political and media analyzes. Some host countries have responded to the refugee crisis by creating strict legal frameworks even though they violate refugee laws (Mim, 2020). For example, in 2018, Hungary’s anti-immigration law criminalized those who helped illegal immigrants gain political asylum. There is significant resource inflation in local communities.

The lack of essentials in refugee camps therefore poses a serious threat to the security of Bangladesh’s displaced population. In addition to the humanitarian disaster of the refugees, there is a significant problem in Bangladesh and regional administrations that needs to be examined from a security perspective. In Bangladesh, the refugee problem is now seen not only as a humanitarian problem but also as a potential political threat to internal security and regional relations. According to political analysts, this problem poses a nontraditional security threat to Bangladesh.

Religious extremism

Even within the camps, security concerns were reported. Refugees accused local security personnel of not providing adequate protection. Ullah (2016) investigates and reveals links between refugee camps and the largest Islamic political organization, Harkat-ul-Jihad-Islami (HuJI), a violent extremist terrorist organization. Political groups in Bangladesh continue to debate the regional security implications of the Rohingya refugee crisis. According to Rahman (2010), the refugee camps in Bangladesh’s Cox’s Bazar district, where the Rohingya live, are an ideal recruiting ground for extremist organizations such as the Islamic State. The stateless Rohingyas are defenseless and destitute; to protect themselves and their families, they may resort to violence.

Unless the refugee crisis is addressed comprehensively and over the long term, refugee settlements have the potential to become recruitment centers for Islamic extremist groups. To stop the militarization of refugee settlements, strategies to improve refugee education must be implemented. In the context of refugee-friendly legislation in host states, the possibility of short-term citizenship and temporary work permits for migrants has also been mentioned (Rahman, 2010). This advice from various humanitarian organizations is intended to help refugees integrate into their new communities, but it is highly unlikely that the Bangladeshi government will heed it. As a result, it is difficult for the refugees to become normal citizens and integrate into the host country as they constantly search for work on the black market (Paul, Younas, & Shaheen, 2020). As a result of recent atrocities, concerns about regional security and similar outbreaks of jihad have increased. For example, to disseminate information about human rights abuses against the Rohingya, bloggers and cyber activists in Indonesia, Malaysia and Pakistan have uploaded opinions, unedited videos and photos, and instructions on how to join militant groups in Myanmar. Given the plight of the Rohingya minority in Myanmar, the Muslim community in Rakhine State is angry (Hossain, Ullah, & Mohiuddin, 2022).

Discussions and conclusions

The Rohingya are blamed for the breakdown of security and are increasingly involved in crimes such as robbery, domestic violence, sexual assault and forced labor. The standard of living for locals has deteriorated drastically. Crime rates are high in the two largest refugee camps in the Cox’s Bazar region of Bangladesh. Nayapara and Kutupalang can have a negative impact on surrounding villages. Between December 2018 and June 2019, the number of trafficking cases recorded by the International Organization for Migration quadrupled. Local security concerns should be reevaluated given the many aspects and difficulties (Goodman & Mahmood, 2019).

According to available research and field studies, refugees pose a major challenge to host countries due to a number of potential economic issues and their impact on security and local livelihoods. Bangladesh, despite its large population and scarce resources, manages to provide health care and schooling to its children. Through their access to cheap labor, refugees exacerbate existing economic inequalities and alter market structures in host countries. Near refugee camps, refugees compete with local workers for temporary labor based on average daily wages (Sattar, 2019). As migrants cut down trees and clear forests to earn a living in the camps, they are seen as a potential threat to the environment. Thirty tent camps have been established on the hilly land, resulting in the destruction of trees and an estimated damage of 4.5608 crore taka. Deforestation by Rohingya refugees cutting firewood to build better settlements has affected the ability of locals to earn a living from the land (Tania, Tasnim, & Islam, 2023). Cox’s Bazar, the district where the refugee camp is located, is the site of Bangladesh’s main seaport as well as a strategic commercial center. The massive security measures in the port area are expected to have a significant impact on trade and tourism.

The influx of refugees is putting tremendous pressure on the local population. As the cost of living in Bangladesh rises in response to increased demand for basic goods from the flood of migrants, tensions between asylum seekers and the local population have increased (Sattar, 2019). In addition, refugees have claimed that they do not receive enough basic support from host countries and aid agencies, particularly UNHCR. However, there is friction between the local population, who urgently have the same needs as refugees but do not receive assistance from development partners. As a result of these stereotypes, tensions may arise between locals and refugees in the future (Wolf, 2017).

It seems possible that refugees’ economic goals are linked to radicalization, as refugees often resort to violence to defend their economic interests. Economically, the refugee situation creates a “vicious cycle” that could further weaken the security system and threaten the quality of local governance in the host country. It is true that international organizations such as UNHCR have praised Bangladesh for hosting migrants. However, this may have a negative impact on the local population and the country’s resources. The border between Bangladesh and Myanmar has become a major crossing point for illegal activities (Alam, Kaur, & Kabir, 1994). The Myanmar government is blamed for the proliferation of drugs in Bangladesh, which negatively affect young people (Uddin, 2019). According to the Bangladesh Drug Enforcement Agency, the border is a major corridor for drug trafficking. Some manufacturers within Myanmar’s borders continuously produce and supply illicit drugs to the Bangladeshi market despite various precautions taken by Bangladeshi security agencies. Due to the rough terrain along the border, refugees are used as transporters or middlemen (Mannan, 2017). For this reason, the Rohingya refugee crisis has become the focus of discussion.

The ongoing suffering and future of the Rohingya population are uncertain positions in the major global powers that have something to do with them. However, major powers in these regions compound concerns when they prioritize their nation’s interests without regard to the internal prosperity and security of their citizens. So, from a humanitarian point of view, we can conclude that peaceful coexistence with host communities are of great importance. However, the political solution of whether they will return to their homeland or choose a separate area for them is also of great importance. The Rohingya refugee crisis may continue until a political solution is found.