Swapna Bhattacharya, former Professor and Head, South & Southeast Asian Studies, Calcutta University
After the publication of the book The Rakhine State (Arakan) of Myanmar: History, Culture and Conflict in 2015, I actually took a quiet distance from this particular subject of Bangladesh – Myanmar Relations over the Rohingya issue. I must add here that the term “Rohingya” is not accepted by the Myanmar Government and a large section of Myanmarese people. According to the 1982 Citizenship Law, ( Khan, 2023: 156) there are restrictions and limitation to award citizenship for all concerned. The Government from the earlier period too – gave a lot of attention to verify the documents which the residents possess or in cases not able to show. But, the name “Rohingya” – is widely used by international community and their ( Rohingya people’s ) distress has attracted world’s attention. There are Rohingya refugees not only in India, but also in various Southeast Asian countries, and elsewhere. The subject has already been over-discussed; and I am afraid to get lost in the plethora of researches highlighting aspects, ranging from Human Rights violation, big power rivalry to possibility of outbreak of terrorism from this long-drawn deprivation. China‘s maritime aspiration in the Bay of Bengal ( Kyaukphyu port and connectivity projects) to draw maximum resources often come in connection with the present subject. The present paper however is simple, and based on some historical facts, which may be important to revisit in the present context.
My abovementioned book ends with developments in the Chittagong-Rakhine front up to 2012. The chapters, eight (8) in number, highlighted among other subjects, the historical encounter of the Rakhine State with Bengal ( Gutman, 2001) at various phases, almost from the time of the Buddha ( in form of the great Mahamuni) through the golden era of the Mrauk-U or Sayyid Alaol’s Rosanga ( 1430-1784) in the Kaladan valley, overlapping of cultural assets of Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam with their polymorphous traditions, Annexation of Arakan by the Bamar ( Burman) king Bodawpaya (1784), and the politics of wooing the regionalism of the Buddhist Rakhines by the British to control the richest agricultural corridor in the Bay of Bengal littoral. After all, the capital of Arakan, Akyab or modern Sittwe, was one of the busiest rice exporting ports in the whole world. The Rakhine kingdom was also well-connected with Upper Myanmar region, routes being across the Rakhine Yoma (Gommans & Leider eds. 2002). The often discussed narrative of dichotomy of — “ Buddhist South versus Muslim North” — has its genesis in the massive communal polarization during the World War Second ( 1942-1945). Historians like Hugh Tinker (1967), Moshe Yegar (1972) and Klaus Fleishmann (1981), whose works I often referred, adequately gave attention to various economic, social and political reasons, leading to this divide. In the British censuses from the 1920- 1940s, the dichotomy between the bona-fide residents of Arakan and Immigrants from Chittagong is repeatedly focussed (Bhattacharya 1994). The mass movement of people from Chittagong, Comilla and Noakhali to the rural areas of Maungdaw, Buthidaung and Rathedaw as well as Akyab was due to economic opportunities. The ports of Chittagong was well connected to Akyab, while for using the land route, the river Naaf (Tinker, 1967: 357) had to be crossed.
The British used this important corridor of northern Arakan and its Muslim population to build up a strong front to resist the Japanese forces. On the other hand, the Japanese forces were backed by the Buddhist Rakhines, who are known by the name “Maghs” (Abdul Mabud Khan, 1999).
Other details of Communist Party’s involvement to use this situation declaring a “ anti-fascist war” considerably isolated the Rakhine Muslims, and the Rakhine nationalist scenario altogether. Instead the spirit of the AFPFL ( Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League) of the mainland , Independent Arakan Parliamentary Group (IAPG) was more dominating. Though one does not know much about ACP/Arakanese Communist Party (K. Fleischmann, 1989: 143), but its creation considerably polarized and divided the national spirit. Those interested can go through a few pages from my book India-Myanmar relations: 1886-1948 (Bhattacharya, 2007:371-378). Thus, Myanmar or former Burma was born in 1948 with this troubled region, which otherwise gave birth to so many great monks (U Ottama), intellectuals and politicians. I may just add here that, none other than Dr. Ambedkar got initiated to Buddhism by a Rakhine monk, U Chandramani.
From yet another level, the root of the problem can be traced back to the unnatural birth of Pakistan out of Bharat. Most of the Muslims of Myanmar (except the Panthey /Chinese Muslims) are of Indian origin, but well-settled in various cities (Yangon, Mandalay, Akyab) with their families and praying houses or mosques. The Kaman Muslims of the Rakhine State have also their origin in India. As we know, the last Mughal Emperor’s graveyard (Mazar of Bahadur Shah Zafar) in the heart of Yangon is a solemn meeting place for all Muslims (also Hindus and Buddhists) from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. I have visited the place several times. Interestingly, a large number of northern Rakhine Muslims were counted in the Census as “Indian”, at time Chittagonian, Bengali etc. Even after 1937 Separation of British Burma from British India, their immigration into Burma was permitted. Muslims of Myanmar from the Mainland as well as from this frontier state is intensely attached with undivided India or Bharat. This is why Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose had a huge support from the Muslims of British Burma, who vehemently opposed the Partition Plan and contributed tremendously in the INA Movement (Bhattacharya, 2007:Chapter VII & 2023 13) .
The transition from colonial period to the period of Nation Building (decolonization) in South and Southeast Asia has been a complex process itself; religious divides, China-backed communist insurgences and outbreak of the Cold War were as destructive as domestic rivalries within the newly emerged nation states. U Nu, the first Prime Minister of independent Myanmar (former Burma) as well as his successor General Ne Win tried to bring peace in this part, but constraint of making friendship with all, had its price. Even, General Aung San, who gave remarkable leadership to his country during difficult years of late 1930s and early 1940s, perhaps did not give due attention to this very important border state. In the post-independence period, this particular corridor had to be kept open, fluid, and low-key. As a result it became a kind of free ground for several vulnerabilities — like smuggling of rice, movements of people involved in various unofficial trade etc. who apparently preferred not to be identified with one or the other nation. Myanmar had to surrender to certain extent to compromise with the increasing pressure of China-Pakistan Axis. As discussed in my book (Bhatacharya 2015: 125;) , China brought MNF (Mizo National Front) and BCP ( Burma Communist Party) together, where the South Mizoram – Chittagong Hill Tracts and Rakhine corridor — became a safe passage for movements of insurgents, threatening India’s security.
Coming back to Bengal Frontier, the presence of Mahayana elements and Vishnava liberal traditions (Jatindramohan Bhattachrya, 1962), made the perfect ground for the Arab traders and Sufi saints to preach Sufi-dominated Islamic culture. The translation of Persian and Hindustani literature into Bengali done by the poets of East Bengal in the court of Arakan mobilised the masses to get integrated. The Mughal expansionism became an inspirational factor or challenge for the interdependence between the Rakhine Mrauk-U kingdom (Bengali Rasonga) and the Bengali Sultans, and vice-versa over the period from the 15th to the 18th centuries. Polymorphism and liberal traditions were essential part of daily life with Mahamuni worship (Bhattacharya, 2013) enjoying a great popularity among Buddhists of this entire region. This rich agricultural corridor (Chittagong-Rakhine) attracted many other Europeans (Portuguese & Dutch), who were interested in all kinds of trades, including slave trade. Rabindranath Tagore more, than any other person, foresaw immense potentiality in this region (Rakhine-Chittagong-Tripura) for development of a liberal cosmopolitanism and urban prosperity. One has only to read his works, Dalia, Rajarshi, Mukut among other pieces (Bhattacharya, 2019).
The influx of some 700,000 people, belonging to Islamic faith from the Rakhine State’s Buthidaung, Maungdaw and Rathedaw to Bangladesh’s Cox’s bazaar in 2017 can be considered as a routine event – though of a more formidable nature – compared to earlier two occasions in 1977-79 (Bhattacharya, 1995) and 1991-93 (Bhattacharya, 2001). On the first occasion, out of 200,000, some 175,000 went back to Myanmar through mutual negotiations between the two countries, while from the time 1991-93, a considerable number could not be taken back or not willing to go back for whatever reasons. During the 1991-93 Begum Khaleda Zia immediately arranged camps along 50 km long road between the plains of Teknaf and the District Headquarter Cox’s Bazaar. The second exodus coincided with the political crisis emerged out of the Pro-Democracy Movement within Myanmar.
On both the occasions, India’s eastern and north eastern parts were considerably challenged (Bhattacharya, 2001 & 2015) by occasional infiltration of armed groups directly or indirectly connected with militant wings of the Rohingyas (Berlie,57-63). Newspapers from Bangladesh regularly reported fleeing of refugees from the camps in all possible directions. Quite often – as Indian newspapers reported- armed Rohingyas sneaked into Indian territories (Tripura, for example), joining hands with home-grown or immigrant insurgents, based in our soil. Within Bangladesh such violent posture came as a biggest threat for the people of the Chittagong Hill Tracts or CHT. Hundreds and thousands of Rohingyas and also plains dwellers were quietly allowed to settle in the CHT. Such direct provocation deeply angered the Chakmas (Mohsin, 2002) and other tribal groups, ultimately leading to their militarisation. Was there any plan to vacate the land for settling the Rohingyas? This question directly or indirectly came up in the works of many experts (Chakma, 1986 & Mukherjee, 2000). Without directly linking the Rohingya Issue with any specific political party or groups, one has to accept that peace could be restored in the CHT through signing of the Peace Accord between the Parvatya Chattagrama Janasamhati Samiti (PCJSS) and the Government of Bangladesh on 2 December 1997.This was perhaps possible since Sheikh Hasina took the leadership of the country in June 1996.
Looking back, during 1940s when the disillusioned groups of northern Rakhine Muslims failed to impress the leaders of their demand for a homeland within emerging Burma , adjustments had to be made between the leaders of Pakistan and Burma ( modern Myanmar) where Mohammad Ali Jinnah had to promise (Bhattacharya, 2015: 94, 102) that he would not pay heed to the demand of the northern Rakhine Muslims for a homeland, and Aung San had to promise Jinnah that CHT , where Buddhism was the major religion, would not be encouraged to join the emerging Burma. Indeed, the fear of joining India loomed larger; the Buddhist Chakma people perhaps hoisted Indian flag, while Marmas felt more attached to Myanmar. Thus, out of this genesis of dissatisfied isolated Muslims of northern Arakan, came a call of “ War” against the then Burmese Government led by U Nu. Though I was adequately aware of this formidable chapter of Myanmar History through works of Hugh Tinker, Mosche Yegar, Klaus Fleischman and others, had I not consulted the files kept in the National Archives Department of the government of Myanmar, I could never be convinced of the formidability of this challenge. The entire period from late 1940s (Fleischamann, 1989: 62) to late 1950s Arakan experienced extreme situation created by the Mujahids who placed several demands (Bhattacharya 2015: 105-106) for the equal treatment with their Buddhist co-brethren.
The handing over of power by U Nu to General Ne Win temporarily (1958-1960), and then finally in 1962 have to be seen as part of this difficult crisis.. That with this, a “new era” in Myanmar’s foreign relation opened with China’s massive influence over Myanmar, does not need to be repeated. The year 1962 is also the year when China was attacked by India. Interestingly, the same Rohingyas who were demanding a separate space and recognition, suddenly wanted “protection” from what they called infiltration of “illegal Chittagonians”. In response, U Nu created in May 1961 the centrally protected Mayu Frontier Administration (Yegar,1972: 105). This caused the awarding of the statehood of Arakan again delayed.
Various examples of a Myanmar-China Pakistan Axis during 1960s and 1970s can be cited, but most formidable example is when a group of Rohingyas thanked Ne Win for providing shelter within the Rakhine territory when the Muktiyuddha started (Flesichmann, 1981: 103-104). This news came out during Ne Win’s visit to Karachi in 1974 (Bhattacharya,2001:111). Obviously, a great number of northern Rakhines, predominantly Muslims, were against the great spirit of Bangladesh’s war of independence. In view of this persisting separatist spirit among a section of the Muslims of the Rakhine State, it is understandable why Bangladesh wants a peaceful resolution to the problem, and has been maintaining overall peace in the refugee camps with remarkable skill and dedication. Myanmar’s concern has also its reason. Both the countries have shown remarkable patience in this regard. India too, without interfering in the domestic affairs of her neighbours, also not being signatory to UN Conventions, did what it could to bring stability.
The lull experienced a major jolt when on 1 February 2021 a coup displaced the democratically elected (Election of 2020) NLD Government and captured all state power. Senior General Min Aung Hlaing became the Head of the State. The kind of parallel Government of NUG (National Unity Group) is actually not recognised by the Army led present Government As a result of this, the prospect for repatriation, if planned at all, for these stateless people living in Cox’s bazar district’s two refugee camps Kutupalong and Nayapara, dipped into uncertainty. Most of them had entered Bangladesh in August 2017 as a result of a massive violence triggered by Army’s attack on several Rohingya villages. The Army however defended their action by stating that the Army post was attacked. One witnessed however that streams of people, predominately women and children, under extreme condition walked day and night to reach Cox’s Bazaar for immediate shelter and relief. The Government under the leadership of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina very kindly came to their help, and was seen as a true protector (mother figure) for these hapless people. Within a very short time (September 2017), Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, headed by Dr. S. Jaishankar, undertook a huge operation, called Insaniyat. Under this scheme supply of relief with food and other articles of daily use reached the camp dwellers. This is normal as part of the “Neighbourhood First” Policy (S. Jaishankar, 2019: 41) of the present Government under Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi with our country’s special relation with Bangladesh among South Asian nations.
I remember during my visits to Yangon in the years 2012 and 2013, some tensions were mounting in the Rakhine State of which I read in Myanmar language newspapers. My subsequent two visits, in 2015 and 2016 in Yangon, Dagon, Mandalay and Pagan were full of nice experiences. Thus, I could never imagine that such a large-scale violence would again break out, as it happened in 2021. No wonder that the Islamic countries and western world condemned the way the Rohingya problem was kept going on. The outbreak of a coup on 1 February, 2021 changed the entire political scenario (Bhatia, 2023: 23); making an end of the former State Counsellor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s cooperation with Army backed USDP. There had been some suggestions by the former Secretary General of UN Kofi Annan-headed Committee for rethinking of the Rohingya people’s legal status and their proper rehabilitation within the Republic. However, things took a negative turn when Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the Government of Myanmar jointly defended the position (S. Banerjee, 2023: 167), taken by them, stating that it was an internal matter of Myanmar. The term “ Rule of Law” was often used by the Myanmar Government in describing the problem of the northern Rakhine State.
In concluding my observations, it should be reiterated that the Rohingya Issue is a bilateral one; entirely between Bangladesh and Myanmar. I have full faith in the people and Institutions of these two countries. At international level, I have worked intensively with many front ranking Bay of Bengal scholars; yet, I feel, I have also learnt tremendously from my interactions with scholars and ordinary people of various faiths living across Myanmar and Bangladesh. I have been visiting Bangladesh several times since 1980. Being in Chittagong, Comilla (Mainamati archaeological site) and Cox’s Bazaar in connection with an academic project on Buddhist Pilgrimage (2010) I preferred not to visit the refugee camps. My several academic programs at the universities of Yangon, Dagon, Mandalay and other Government Institutions in Yangon also did not leave much time to visit the Rakhine State. After visiting many archaeological sites across Myanmar, a visit to the sites of Vesali-Dhanyvati –Mrauk-U in the Kaladan-Lemro valley is certainly in my preferred list. I met many wonderful Rakhine scholars at various institutions and Universities. In several BIMSTEC conferences held at various Kolkata-based Thinks Tanks I suggested joint academic projects (in the areas Art, Archaeology, Literature and Buddhist Studies) by Indian, Bangladeshi and Myanmar scholars, as both the neighbours, Myanmar and Bangladesh have full faith in the Indian people and the present NDA- led Government at the Centre. We could invite scholars from Japan and ASEAN countries to join us.
The UNHCR and other UN agencies should continue their valuable humanitarian works and permitted duties of negotiation, so that the region does not become a battle field for big power rivalry over natural and human resources. In this complex Post- Covid multi-polar world with war and war-like conflicts going on in so many corners, who wants to see further conflict? After the successful G 20 Summit in Delhi, many changes are expected to come, bringing more stability and prosperity in the entire Indo-Pacific region. A “Myanmar-Bangladesh-India continuum” which has often been presented in my researches is immensely vital in this process of connecting the Bengal Littoral with West Asia – Arab World and Europe on the one hand, and the United States of America on the other. After all, the United States, not being a colonial power always played a constructive role in the world of Trade and Knowledge. Japan’s role as a generous donor and friend of the people of Myanmar, Bangladesh and India in particular is also expected to bring stability and prosperity.
Bibliography:
Bhatia, Rajiv ( Amb.) . 2023.’ The Importance of Being Aung San Suu Kyi’ in In Brig. Vinod Anand and Cchavi Vasisht eds. Revisiting MYANMAR: Present through Past, Delhi: Vivekananda International Foundation, Pentagon Press LLP, pp. 16-30.
Berlie, J.A. 2008. The Burmanization of Myanmar’s Muslims. Bangkok: White Lotus.
Banerjee, Sreeparna. 2023. ‘Assessing the Civil Military Responses toward the Rohingya Community’. In Vinod Anand and Cchavi Vasisht eds. Revisiting MYANMAR: Present through Past, Delhi: Vivekananda International Foundation, Pentagon Press LLP,161-174.
Bhattacharya, Jatindramohan. 1962. Banglar Vaishnava-bhavapanna Musalman Kavi . Calcutta: Calcutta University.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 1994. ‘Religio-Ethnic Identity of “Rohingya Refugees” – A Historical perspective’. Occasional paper, Department of South & Southeast Asian Studies, University of Calcutta, pp. 1-39.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 1995.’ Bangladesh- Myanmar Relations: A study of the Problem of Refugees in Bangladesh’. In Integration Disintegration and World Order: Some perspectives on the Process of Change, ed. Arun Banerjee, Calcutta: Allied Publishers in collaboration with School of International Relations and Strategic Studies, Jadavpur University, pp. 69-89.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 1995. ‘Imperialist provocation and Muslims of Arakan/Myanmar 1942-48’ . Proceedings of Indian History Congress, 55th Session. Aligarh Muslim University. Published by Prof. R.L. Shukla. Department of History, University of Delhi, pp. 542-50
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2001. ‘Rohingyas of Myanmar: The Identity Crisis and its Implications for Myanmar, Bangladesh and India’. In Ethnicity Identity and the State in South Asia, ed. Kausar J. Azam. New Delhi: South Asian Publishers, pp. 86-123.
Bhattacharya, Swapna.2001. ‘The refugee-generating Chittagong Hill Tracts: Past, Present and Future’. In Refugees and Human Rights, ed. Sanjoy Roy, Jaipur & Delhi: Rawat Publications, pp. 345-360.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2002. ‘Myth and History of Bengali identity in Arakan’. In Jos Gommans and Jaques eds., Maritime Frontier of Burma LeiderKITLV Press: Amsterdam, 199-212.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2007. India – Myanmar Relations 1886-1948. Kolkata: K.P. Bagchi
Bhattachray, Swapna. 2013. Myanmar’s own Way of Democracy, Peace and Reconciliation: Introspective Observation from a Friend of Myanmar’. In Searching for Non-Western Roots of Conflict Resolution: Discourses, Norms and case Studies., ed. Shantanu Chakrabarty. Institute of Foreign Policy studies, Calcutta University. Delhi: Knowledge World, pp. 129-162.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2013. ‘ Buddhism in Arakan: Some Observations’. In Script Identity: A Study in Sylhet Nagri , ed. anuradha Chanda. Kolkata: Dey’s Publishing & MAKAIAS, pp. 63-78.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2015. The Rakhine (Arakan) State of Myanmar: Interrogating History, Culture and Conflict. Delhi & Calcutta: Manohar & MAKAIAS
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2019. Rabindranath Tagore and Myanmar: India’s Act East Policy and India-Myanmar Relations. Kolkata: Firma KLM Pvt. Ltd.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2023. ‘Nuances of power-sharing, Conflict and Consensus in the Light of Dhamma: Myanmar at the Crossroad’. In Vinod Anand and Cchavi Vasisht eds. Revisiting MYANMAR: Present through Past, Delhi: Vivekananda International Foundation, Pentagon Press LLP, pp. 3-15.
Chakma, Siddharta. 1985. Prasanga Parvatya Chattagram. Kolkata: Nath Publishers.
Fleischmann, Klaus. 1981. Arakan: Ein Konfliktregion zwischen Birma and Bangladesh. Hamburg: Institut fuer Asienkunde.
Fleischmann, Klaus. 1989. Documents on Communism in Burma 1945-1977. Hamburg: Institut fuer Asienkunde.
Fleischmann, Klaus. 1989. Die Kommunistische partei Birmas: Von den anfangen bis zur Gegenwart. Hamburg: Institut fuer Asienkunde.
Gomamns, Jos and Jacques Leider eds.2002. The Maritime Frontier of Burma: Exploring Political, Cultural and Commercial interaction in the Indian Ocean World 1200-1800. KNAW, Amsterdam. Leiden: KITLV Press.
Gutman, Pamela. 2001. Burma’s lost Kingdom: Splendours of Arakan. Bangkok: Orchid Press.
Islam, Mohammed. Emadadul. 2020. Rohingya: Nishshanga Nipirita Jatigoshthi. Dhaka: Prathama.
Jaishankar, S. 2019. ‘Building credibility’ . In India’s Foreign Policy: Towards Resurgence, ed., Dhruv C. Katoch. India Foundation, New Delhi. New Delhi: Pengaton Press LLp, pp. 41-44.
Khan, Abdul Mabud. 1999. The Magha. Dhaka: UPL
Khan, Nazia ( Dr.) . 2023. ‘Buddhism, Constitutionalism and the Status of Ethnic Minorities in Myanmar. In Vinod Anand and Cchavi Vasisht eds., Revisiting MYANMAR: Present through Past, Delhi: Vivekananda International Foundation, Pentagon Press LLP, pp. 153-160.
Mohsin, Ameena. 2002. The Politics of Nationalism. The Case of Chittagong hill Tracts Bangladesh. Dhaka: University Press Limited.
Mukherjee, Saradindu.2000. Subjects, Citizens and Refugees: Tragedy in the Chittagong hill Tracts (1947-1998). New Delhi: Indian Centre for the Study of Forced Migration.
Pramanik, Bimal,. 2010. Indian people’s Response to Bangladesh Liberation War. Kolkata: Patralekha