The Rohingya Crisis and the Fight for Burmese Democracy: Where is the international community?
Sudan, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Ukraine, Palestine.
All of these examples were discussed in the first few sessions of the World Bank’s biannual Fragility, Conflict, and Violence Group’s Fragility Forum 2024. Of course, their inclusion in the panel discussions was entirely appropriate; each of these countries presents (or presented) unique challenges in achieving the full spectrum of human rights due to conflict, generalized violence, and “fragility” (admittedly, this last is a fraught and contested term).
However, there was one country whose name I kept waiting to hear: Myanmar.¹ Unfortunately, its omission was not surprising to me, and it reinforced the central question of this piece: why aren’t we talking about Myanmar more?
An exceedingly brief history
It is my hope that most people are at least aware that many Burmese are suffering severe human rights abuses. The current situation has deep roots that extend all the way to British colonial rule and could constitute an entire article in themselves. However, it is important to understand at least the recent history here.
Myanmar is a predominantly Buddhist country, with a Muslim ethnic minority group known as the Rohingya. Though the Rohingya have lived in Myanmar for centuries, they have been denied citizenship for the last few decades and have since been living as stateless persons in their own home country. Discrimination and violence against the ethnic and religious group predated the 1982 Citizenship Law that functionally stripped the Rohingya of their right to exist as equal citizens in Myanmar. However, in 2017, the military escalated this violence into a large-scale operation against the Rohingya, who largely inhabit Rakhine state. Civilians have been attacked, their homes burned, and sexual violence has been widespread. Urged on by racist and Islamophobic social media rhetoric, this campaign is explicit in its goal to “exterminate” the Rohingya, who are framed as foreign invaders. The campaign is widely regarded as ethnic cleansing, with multiple actors, including the United States government, labeling it a genocide. Such a designation is not made lightly; the Rohingya genocide was only the eighth such designation the US has ever made. It signifies a genuinely unimaginable level of violence, hatred, and suffering. Among other things, a genocide designation requires dehumanization of a population and an attempt at their extermination. Given the levels of suffering among the Rohingya over the five years between the start of the campaign and the final designation in 2022, many have criticized the US for its lack of attention to this issue, which signals that Myanmar is not a priority. For comparison, the United Nations issued a report in 2018 concluding that “senior generals of the Myanmar military should be investigated and prosecuted in an international criminal tribunal for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.”
Technically, Myanmar was a democracy at the start of this campaign. Its de facto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, was widely regarded as a champion of democracy. She had served years of house arrest under the old military junta and had received a Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 for her nonviolent efforts to promote democracy in Myanmar. However, in practice many believed that Aung San Suu Kyi had little power over the military and claimed that she could not openly support the Rohingya or condemn the genocide for fear of losing her remaining authority over the country. At other times, she defended the military against accusations of genocide.
This gambit ultimately failed, as Aung San Suu Kyi’s administration was overthrown in an attempted coup d’etat by the military in 2021. Unlike other coups, for example the recent coup in Niger, the one in Myanmar was widely disparaged by the population, who have courageously turned out to protest despite the very real threat posed by the military. The Burmese remain under military rule today, past the third anniversary of the attempted coup.
In the years since 2017, many Rohingya and some of their non-Rohingya Burmese compatriots have fled Myanmar. Tragically, a large number of Rohingya refugees live in desperate conditions and are met with hostility by the local population. Particularly large populations of Rohingya refugees live in Bangladesh, India, and Indonesia, and each of those environments has proven treacherous. Meanwhile, conditions within Myanmar have continued to deteriorate.
No salvation in Bangladesh
Unlike in the early days of the wars in Syria and Ukraine, the world showed no outpouring of support and welcome to the Rohingya. They have largely fled to nearby countries, to communities whose resources are often already stretched thin. Their reception has been mixed; Bangladesh, for example, hosts the largest number of Rohingya refugees and has attempted to establish support programs. However, the Rohingya have also largely been confined to camps in the Cox’s Bazar district, where they are faced with severe overcrowding, lack of permanent shelter, lack of employment, denial of access to services such as healthcare and education, and extreme vulnerability to Bangladesh’s volatile weather events. International funding to support the population directly or facilitate programming through the government of Bangladesh has fallen far short of what is needed. Close to one million people inhabit the camps of Cox’s Bazar, and more than half a million Bangladeshis nearby also lack access to basic services and face serious humanitarian needs. Despite its relative poverty, the Bangladeshi government remains the largest donor to humanitarian efforts in the area. According to the UN refugee agency, international funding for the humanitarian response in Bangladesh has only reached 20% of what is needed.
Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh have faced increasing hostility from authorities and some members of the local population as their displacement continues. The Cox’s Bazar camps have seen repeated deadly fires, some of which have been attributed to arson by nearby gangs. The poor quality and crowded conditions of the camp’s shelters allow fires to spread rapidly, destroying many dwellings in a short time and threatening the lives of people who have already lost everything at least once. Fires such as the one in January 2024 sometimes also destroy what few educational, health, or community facilities exist in the camps. Ironically, at other times residents’ tents are flooded by the monsoon rains, a situation which also increases the likelihood of disease outbreaks, especially cholera. Violence against refugees, including sexual violence, is a serious problem. Refugees must attempt to navigate a byzantine system of permissions to even report incidents to the police, only to be met with demands for bribes and legal fees they cannot pay. Increasing gang infiltration of the camps due to poor security has given the police an excuse to crack down more violently on perceived crimes, though innocent Rohingya are frequently jailed while the gangs continue their violence. Reports of kidnappings, roture, and sexual abuse by police officers indicate a pattern of abuse against the refugees, who generally have no legal recourse after suffering such human rights violations. Recent spates of abductions and human trafficking by gangs and other criminal elements have further heightened refugees’ sense of insecurity.
Recent funding cuts have also made it even more difficult for refugees in Bangladesh’s camps to access care for noncommunicable and chronic diseases such as cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. Their pain is exacerbated by poor or even nonexistent health facilities and inadequate nutrition. Confined to the camps with a diet largely consisting of donated rice, many have fled violence and persecution only to suffer from more mundane but equally devastating challenges.
Facing hate from all sides
Other Rohingya have made it to India, where they have fallen victim to the preexisting tensions between the Hindu majority and Muslim minority in the country. As in their country of origin, Rohingya in India have been put at risk by hate speech fueled by traditional and social media, which has legitimized violence against the population and framed them as violent invaders. Tragically, this has led to a number of people fleeing the ethnic cleansing in Myanmar only to be killed by violent attacks in India or deported back to Myanmar by the Indian government.
The Rohingyas’ trouble in India largely started with the rise to power of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a Hindu nationalist party, in 2014. The party’s anti-Muslim hate platform spread rapidly on social media, coinciding with the Burmese military’s own anti-Rohingya campaign. These narratives were particularly prevalent on Facebook, where the platform’s algorithms that favored sensationalism allowed them to propagate. Research by Equality Labs has indicated that close to half of hate-speech posts in India are restored by Facebook; even more alarmingly, one hundred percent of Islamophobic posts are restored. A recent court petition by Rohingya refugees and their advocates alleges that these messages have led directly to real-world violence. Indeed, there is plenty of evidence to support such a claim. For example, BJP youth leaders have admitted on X (formerly Twitter) to committing arson in Rohingya settlements, and vigilante attacks have followed campaigns of anti-Rohingya rhetoric. The government has also engaged in a pattern of arbitrary detentions of Rohingya, including children, holding people in inhumane conditions for years.
Recently, years of effort by a coalition of Burmese and international advocates finally bore fruit, as an investigation by the UN Human Rights Commission concluded that the Burmese military was behind the hate campaign on Facebook that fanned the flames at the beginning of the genocide in 2017. However, as the case of India demonstrates, the use of social media to spread hate and encourage violence continues, both within and outside of Myanmar.
The situation within Myanmar
Since the attempted coup in 2021, the situation in Myanmar has deteriorated for people of all ethnicities. To understand more about the current state of affairs, I spoke with Nay Thet, a Burmese research consultant and grassroots organizer currently living in the US.
Ms. Thet confirmed that life has radically changed since 2021. Regular blackpoints and the installation of checkpoints are constant reminders of the junta’s repression. Human rights organizations have moved to neighboring countries because the environment has become untenable. Activists are in constant danger, with sham trials leading to executions, and female human rights activists are at heightened risk of sexual violence. Notably, human rights abuses, including torture and sexual violence, are not limited to activists but are inflicted indiscriminately on the broader population. Despite these risks, people in Myanmar continue to protest against the junta, even as peaceful protesters are met with violence.
Arbitrary violence, including shelling that sometimes levels entire villages, has produced large numbers of internally displaced persons (IDPs). These people are especially affected by blockades, which prevent the movement of aid to the camps in which they sometimes reside. Lack of access to medical care, clean water, and sufficient food have led to many excess deaths in the camps. IDPs and other Burmese are also limited by travel restrictions put in place by the junta, which impede livelihoods and exacerbate Myanmar’s existing economic crisis.
In February, the junta announced that it would begin drafting men aged 18–35 and women aged 18–27, prompting a wave of departures and a sense of loss among young people, who already saw their hopes for a brighter Burmese future crushed by the junta’s rise to power. Because of its broad lack of popular support, the military is also attempting to lure people into service. It has been promising Rohingya confined to IDP camps freedom of movement in exchange for military service. Ms. Thet characterizes this as a cynical attempt to use an already-persecuted population as human shields and to further heighten tensions between them and other ethnic groups. In response to the widespread resistance to the draft, the junta is now refusing work permits to leave the country to conscription-aged men.
In short, the situation in Myanmar is dire for all civilians. While the resistance continues and has even made some military gains recently, people continue to suffer from a combination of repression, deprivation, and violence. The situation is particularly acute for the Rohingya due to their historic marginalization.
No peace without democracy
The challenges facing the Rohingya are multidimensional, but a critical component is their statelessness. Without Burmese citizenship, the Rohingya lack the legal protections they should be afforded in their home country. However, they also lack formal legal status in other countries to which they may flee. The 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness provide guidelines for the protection of stateless persons on the international stage, but many of the states in which large numbers of Rohingya reside — Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Malaysia — are not parties to these instruments. They are likewise not parties to the international refugee protection conventions, and indeed there have been examples of violations of these instruments, such as pushing people back into Myanmar and denying Rohingya access to services. Rohingya who flee may therefore have escaped the immediate conflict, but they still are not safe.
Securing full citizenship for the Rohingya is therefore a prerequisite for any durable solution. However, it is quite clear that having citizenship alone is not protecting Burmese of other ethnicities and religions. Without the establishment of the rule of law and a functional human rights regime, the rights accorded to citizens on paper are meaningless. Thus, the fates of all Burmese are tied to the fate of democracy in the country. This suggests a need for solidarity across ethnic groups with a shared vision of a peaceful Burmese democracy.
I asked Ms. Thet about the current democracy movement and whether that sort of cross-ethnic solidarity was present. She described the present moment as “unprecedented” for that exact reason; the post-coup democracy movement has embraced a more inclusive definition of who counts as Burmese, a definition that is reflected in the federal democracy structure they hope to build. Ms. Thet contrasted this with the 2015 democratic period, which mainly involved the majority Bamar ethnic group. This gives some hope for a more stable democratic future. The inclusion of displaced populations in the movement is somewhat more difficult to determine because it remains a sensitive issue, but there is more conversation around the importance of this than ever before.
A role for the international community
The democracy movement in Myanmar has been incredibly resilient. More than three years after the attempted coup, activists continue to advocate for a democratic transition and local organizations persist in their efforts to support a population that has endured a horrific war. These people’s dedication to their cause is incredibly inspiring, and seems to me like exactly the sort of democratic story my home country of the United States would want to publicly support. However, I rarely see mention of Myanmar or the Rohingya in the US media or government statements.
I asked Ms. Thet about whether the international community can play a role in a potential democratic transition in Myanmar and creating stability for the Rohingya. She highlighted the court case against Facebook as an example of successful collaboration with international partners. Because of the deep history of the ethnic- and religious-based tensions that have permeated the violence in the country, Ms. Thet thinks it is unlikely that these issues can be solved entirely internally.
One way in which the international community can act is to cease funneling aid through the junta. This was a point echoed by Elena, a Burmese human rights advocate who spoke under a pseudonym during the Women, Peace, and Security event hosted by US Campaign for Burma (USCB). Both women noted that aid allocated to the junta rarely reaches those in need. Ms. Thet connects this situation with the perception of the junta as the Burmese government. After rising to power in 2008 on rigged elections, the junta was acknowledged as the government by the international community, and this may permeate through to present day.
However, the Burmese people have been bravely resisting the junta for years, especially since 2021. Democracy activists have been working under impossible conditions to establish representative governance structures. A network of activists, aid workers, and ordinary citizens works each day to care for their fellow Burmese. Imagine what they could do with the international aid that is currently handed to the junta. Administratively, it would be more difficult to facilitate these transfers. However, the current situation virtually ensures that aid is not delivered to the people who need it most. What if international actors decided to be bold and seek out the alternative structures that the Burmese people have sacrificed so much to build?
To better understand the role of the international community, I spoke with Karen Ames, the Managing Director of USCB. Ms. Ames notes that simply refraining from economically supporting the junta and sanctioning those who do could be a powerful act of support for the Burmese population. Organizations such as Burma Campaign UK have published the names of companies in sectors such as shipping and insurance that are facilitating the junta’s access to jet fuel. The frequency of airstrikes has risen precipitously this year, enabled by the continued availability of fuel for the junta’s planes. Governments around the world must unite in imposing sanctions to stop this horrific assault on civilian lives. The US have each imposed some sanctions on different actors affiliated with the junta, but a patchwork of disparate sanctions will never be as effective as a uniform, coordinated sanctions movement.
At the Women, Peace, and Security event and in other spaces, the topic of transitional justice emerged. This concept has gained traction over the last few decades, as peace workers and activists increasingly recognize the importance not only of reconciliation but also of securing justice for the victims of atrocities. Conversations within the Burmese democracy movement have recently moved beyond simply removing the junta and into the space of transitional justice. Given that this process, by definition, must be led from within, I asked Ms. Ames if she believed the international community could play a role. She noted that international allies of Burmese democracy activists can certainly support transitional justice efforts by raising their visibility. This can help sustain momentum and ensure accountability for atrocities. In addition, she notes that governments and organizations can lend technical assistance and expertise to build capacity among resistance and democracy leaders on the ground, in addition to facilitating strategic communication with human rights and democracy movements in other countries.
Like Ms. Thet, Ms. Ames also highlighted the importance of international aid. In the case of transitional justice and the establishment of an inclusive democracy, unrestricted and flexible funding is key. International aid often comes with restrictions and reporting requirements that are burdensome for resource-restricted organizations and movements. Donations may also be time-limited, while the statebuilding and transitional justice processes are decidedly long-term endeavors. It can therefore be both a sign of faith and a genuine act of support to donate unrestricted funds to these efforts, especially on a recurring basis.
Finally, I asked Ms. Ames if she had any advice for individuals wanting to support the human rights and democracy movement in Myanmar. She reminded me that those of us who live in democracies have representatives who are paid to listen to us. She recommends that people begin by educating themselves on the situation in Myanmar via reliable sources, such as USCB, Progressive Voice Myanmar, Justice for Myanmar, Info Birmanie, and Burma Campaign UK (among others). For the social media-inclined, Ms. Ames noted that USCB’s partners on the ground, including Karen Human Rights Group, Women’s League of Burma, and the Ta’ang Women’s Organization, have strong social media presences and post timely and useful information. Armed with their new knowledge, concerned citizens might consider forming a group of like-minded locals to approach their representatives. Those new to activism can even contact USCB, which provides advocacy training programs.
In situations like that facing Myanmar, especially its persecuted and displaced Rohingya population, it is easy to feel defeated and hopeless. However, the Burmese population has been leading by example for years now. All of us, from governments to ordinary citizens, should stand with them in whatever ways we can. They have shown us the way; now we should follow their lead.
¹ Note: throughout this piece, I refer to the country as Myanmar. In the course of my research, I learned more about the name and the country’s previous name, Burma. In short, neither name feels particularly significant to the country’s diverse population, so there is not really a great choice here. I’ve decided to use the name that most other countries use to avoid confusion, but acknowledge that different people have different stances on the two. You can read more here and here.
