Burmese Rohingya in Bangladesh Face an Uncertain Future

Burmese Rohingya in Bangladesh 05/22/2003

By June 30, 2003 the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is planning a dramatic change in its responsibilities towards the remaining 21,000 Rohingya refugees from Burma residing in two camps in Cox’s Bazaar district of Bangladesh. The proposed plan outlines an 18-month assistance program. The guiding principle of the program is self-sufficiency within local communities for refugees who do not opt for repatriation by the proposed July 1 deadline, when UNHCR plans to “disengage” from its role in normal care for refugees, as well as from repatriations.

The plan for this “residual case load,” left over from the influx of 250,000 Rohingya in the early 90s, proposes providing skills training with the intention of enabling refugees to become economically and socially independent by the end of 2004. The proposed plan raises numerous questions and concerns regarding its feasibility and its impact on the future welfare of the refugees from both a humanitarian and protection standpoint. How well can humanitarian assistance or protection be delivered if the main organization mandated to assist and protect this group distances itself from them? Despite the lack of a formal response by the Government of Bangladesh to UNHCR’s initial concept paper and the lack of involvement of NGOs in developing it, UNHCR is moving forward.

As its first step towards implementing the self-sufficiency program, UNHCR has informed its partner NGOs that they need to end their health and nutrition programs, which are focused on children under ten and pregnant and nursing women. The deadline for pulling out is July 1, giving the two agencies that have been working with Rohingya for more than ten years less than three months to disassemble their programs. The purpose of this request is purportedly to streamline health and nutrition programs under the Civil Surgeon’s Office of the Bangladeshi Ministry of Health (MoH).

Although UNHCR has proposed assistance to upgrade the Civil Surgeon’s facilities and capacity, it has not allotted enough time for adequate preparation. Furthermore, the Civil Surgeon’s Office has no previous experience conducting a therapeutic feeding program. Hundreds of malnourished women and children may lose access to any type of supplementary feeding. Government authorities have themselves expressed concern over their ability to take on this caseload independent of NGO funding or expertise. One Government health worker admitted, “The refugees will suffer when the NGOs leave.”

This view has been confirmed by NGO health workers who explained that MoH services are poor and that the Ministry is understaffed. Even with NGO support, MoH workers display a negative attitude towards the Rohingya, which does not bode well for their ability to provide effective care independently. As one NGO staff member remarked, “At this stage a phase out is totally inappropriate.”Nutritional initiatives and water and sanitation programs currently overseen by UNHCR and NGOs will also be drastically reduced. Rates of chronic malnutrition are already at unacceptably high levels --- 53% for adults and 58% for children --- and the planned reduction in services will only make the situation worse.

There is an inherent contradiction in UNHCR’s attempts to reduce assistance and NGO presence by “streamlining” while simultaneously expecting NGOs to increase their self-sufficiency programs. No NGO or UN partner has volunteered to fill the gap to initiate self-sufficiency programs or take responsibility for this “temporary integration” in the immediate future.

With UNHCR withdrawing from the provision of direct assistance, the Government of Bangladesh has the opening it needs to discontinue all social service programs in the camps as part of a strategy to give the Rohingya no choice but to return to Burma. One camp official told RI that without UNHCR it is highly unlikely that NGOs will be allowed to continue their work. One concern is that the World Food Program (WFP) might also be unable to continue distribution of basic food rations. While the proposed UNHCR plan calls for an increase in social services such as vocational training and income generation, the Government has not permitted such initiatives for fear of creating a “pull factor” for other Rohingya in Burma. The Government is unlikely to do so now, especially with UNHCR setting an example by withdrawing their assistance programs.

The UNHCR plan includes assistance to surrounding communities and it may have been hoping that this would serve as an enticement to the Government to allow programs to continue. But given the unpopularity of the Rohingya in Cox’s Bazaar district and elsewhere, the Government will not want to be seen as endorsing a plan that allows these refugees to receive greater benefits or permission to stay. RI believes that the solution the Government envisions is one of ending the assistance program altogether once the UNHCR and its traditional partners are removed from camp-based assistance. UNHCR moving ahead with its self-sufficiency plan absent an agreement with the Government of Bangladesh runs the risk of abandoning the refugees to a situation where they end up with minimal or no assistance.

The reality of the proposed plan may be that the Rohingya will be forced to go back home to a country with a well-documented record of human rights abuses and persecution of its Muslim minority, or face living illegally in Bangladesh. As illegal immigrants they are not allowed to own land, have access to education and public health care, or enjoy the basic rights granted to citizens of Bangladesh. As one local authority stated, “Refugees cannot integrate with the local people. They will have to take care of everything for themselves.

This is difficult in this region when you don’t own property.” Cox’s Bazaar is one of Bangladesh’s poorest and most depressed areas. By UNHCR’s own criterion of fleeing a well-founded fear of persecution, the Rohingya require assistance and protection. Furthermore, their ability to survive in humane conditions in the host country is questionable. UNHCR is facing financial difficulties, but RI questions whether this justifies the removal of their responsibilities to the Rohingya. The Rohingya face a dramatic deterioration in their situation if the UNHCR phase out strategy does not uphold its official mandate and obligation to provide assistance and protection.

Refugees International, therefore, recommends that:

• UNHCR continue its assistance role, allowing NGOs to continue working until a cooperative strategy and action plan have been developed that realistically puts the refugees’ humanitarian and human rights concerns at the forefront.
  
• UNHCR ensure, should it cease its assistance role, that a follow up program has been approved by the Government of Bangladesh (GoB), has secured funding, and provides for a monitoring role for UNHCR.
  
• UNHCR strengthen its role in monitoring and implementing refugee protection
• Should the UNHCR cease its assistance role, the GoB allow a strengthened NGO presence and independent monitoring.
  
• Food and health support be allowed to continue through qualified NGO partners during the proposed self-sufficiency and integration program.