Not Just Closed Borders

The Deeper Implications of the Rohingya Crisis

BY JASMINE CHIA May 24, 2015
The world's attention has been captured by the predicament of more
than 8,000 migrants stranded in the Straits of Malacca, with dwindling
supplies of food and water. The International Organization for Migration
have darkly termed it “maritime ping pong with human life”, and it is the
Rohingya—Burma’s long persecuted ethnic minority—who are the victims
of this incredible failure of international cooperation in Southeast Asian
waters.

The Long Term Rohingya Crisis

In the year that was meant to mark the beginning of ASEAN’s economic
integration, its main member states have displayed a remarkable, and
deadly, commitment to political non-interference. Yet, this crisis is not
simply humanitarian—nor is it simply a problem restricted to boats and
migrants meeting the closed borders of Indonesia, Malaysia and
Thailand. It is not simply a problem of 2015—it is a problem that began
in the 1970s, a problem of systematic discrimination in Myanmar enabled
by equally systematic non-interference by its ASEAN neighbors.

Since 1978, the Myanmar government has organized campaigns under

the guise of “illegal immigration crackdowns”, which have lead to mass
killings, large scale internal displacement and community destruction.
Currently the Rohingya live in conditions where the doctor-patient ratio is
1:80,000, and more than 80% are denied citizenship on the basis of
ethnicity. The Rohingya are considered by the UN to be one of the
world’s most persecuted minorities.

The plight of the Rohingya asylum seekers suddenly rose to the world
stage following the Thai military government’s decision to crack down on
human smuggling. Smugglers used to bring the Rohingya into
neighboring countries and hold them ransom, using them for forced
labor or human trafficking. Now, they are simply being abandoned at
sea. And now, agencies from Human Rights Watch to the UNHCR to the
US State Department are calling this a “humanitarian crisis” that must be
resolved.
The Jews of Asia
The image of stricken, stranded migrants strikes a haunting resemblance
to one of the defining moral failures of World War II: the “Voyage of the
Damned” of the St. Louis. The ship of 937 Jewish asylum seekers left
Hamburg, Germany, in 1939 as Nazi persecution intensified—yet, the
ship was stranded in the Atlantic for a month as both Cuba and the
United States failed to open their borders to the Jews. It was a
humanitarian crisis that sparked international outrage and prompted
European nations to open their borders to the Jews, resolving the issue
by offloading them in France, Belgium and the Netherlands among other
countries.
A humanitarian crisis is always the focal point of international sympathy,
but also leads to an international reaction that prioritizes the fastest,
most efficient solution. However, when Germany promptly conquered the
rest of Europe, these Jews were massacred. It is the recognition of the
political problem, and the attempt to combat it, that is most needed. The
indifference of the American State department condemned the 937 Jews
aboard the St. Louis; yet, it was the indifference of an isolationist United
States to the atrocities of World War II that ultimately condemned the
millions eventually killed.

Already, sympathy is evident across the world.

On a very grassroots level, Thai fisherman Kraiwut Chusakul said in an

interview with CNN,“I feel so sorry for them. It's so different to when you
see these refugees on land, and the conditions are so terrible.” Malaysian
Prime Minster has been quoted saying this was a“humanitarian
catastrophe”, whilst the United Nations Human Rights chief, Zeid Ra'ad al
Hussein, condemned the actions of ASEAN nations“pushing boats full of
vulnerable people back to sea, which will undoubtedly lead to many
unavoidable deaths.” “The Andaman Sea is about to become a floating
mass grave, and it’s because of the failure of governments, including our
own, to do what is necessary,” said former member of U.S. Congress
Tom Andrews.

But what is necessary?

Crisis Resolution?
As of Wednesday 20th May, the governments of Indonesia and Malaysia
have agreed to offer temporary shelter to these refugees. A conference
is being convened in Thailand on May 29th to address this emergency.
Notably, these measures are framed with language such as “temporary”
and “emergency”—and whilst it appears action is being taken, the
policies of the Myanmar government that lead to this crisis still appear to
be in motion. Just four days ago, Major Zaw Htay, director of the office
of Myanmar’s president, stated blatantly, “We will not accept the
allegations made by some that Myanmar is the source of the problem.”

There is no talk on any government’s behalf of decisively pressuring

Naypyidaw to reassess its discriminatory policies, nor is there a
movement to reinstate the autonomous region within Burma that the
British once gave to the Rohingya. There is talk of providing shelter for
the Rohingya, but there is no talk of providing a state.

If this political crisis is to be resolved, that is the talk that needs to be

had. Undoubtedly, ASEAN nations have a moral imperative to address
the Rohingya migrants’ plight. But it is one far greater than what is being
proposed, and it requires a commitment to something ASEAN countries
have rarely been able to do: take a moral stance against political
wrongdoing.