A mechanism has to be evolved for developing a pro-active strategy for steadfast integration of Rohingya refugees to ensure a sustainable future for them and prevent further conflicts
Currently, more than 900,000 Rohingya refugees inhabit the squalid and highly congested settlements of the southernmost district of Bangladesh, Cox’s Bazar. With dependence on external humanitarian assistance mounting every passing day, the lives of hundreds of thousands of ‘forcibly displaced Myanmar nationals’, as the Government of Bangladesh officially defines these refugees, remain perpetually uncertain. Many land owners and those otherwise earning a decent livelihood over there have been forced to seek succour in a foreign land so as to escape targeted violence and torture by the military in Myanmar.
While violence hasn’t broken out between different groups in the refugee population and radicalisation hasn’t cropped up as an evident threat, tensions simmer across the camps. Maintenance of peace and prevention of conflict demands a bottom-up grassroots approach. As has been conceded in such highly volatile conflict hotspots, building peace at the ground level helps mitigate conflict over the long-term.
The ‘human needs approach’ to conflict best captures the grassroot scenario: Here universal needs take priority over a top-down modus operandi for conflict prevention. Meeting basic needs of the subject population is imperative if co-existence is to be sustained in a competitive environment such as Cox’s Bazar where scant resources are under huge strain.
Universal needs comprise not only food, water and shelter but also immediate protection and environment needs that must be met to contain insecurity. In contexts like these, distribution of insecurity between different cultural or ethnic groups in the refugee community has widespread repercussions.
The focus, therefore, must be on relative, and not just absolute deprivation as this can fuel grievances, thereby precipitating violent behaviour. Effective measures to assimilate the incoming population will adequately contribute towards sustainable livelihood goals.
In the refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar, there are different factions of registered refugees — who reached Bangladesh before the 2017 influx and hold refugee status in the country — to the unregistered refugees who crossed the border in 2017. The surrounding host community also figures as one of the poorest in the country. Hence, tension between and among these groups has been a recurring threat.
On to this dry tinder comes the spark of radicalisation by various extremist groups, both indigenous Bangladeshi and radical groups from Myanmar. As the situation is ripe for radical groups to prosper, across the length and breadth of the camps, conflict mitigation is even more at a premium. With a majority of the refugee population yet to be formally recognised by the Government, challenges of accommodating diverse groups are enormous.
The focus must be on assuaging the basic needs that has for long been a priority for humanitarian agencies in situ. For instance, food assistance to the larger audience as ensured by the World Food Programme is a step towards fulfilling universal needs, which if left unmet, could otherwise foment a pernicious conflict.
‘Human security’, a concept developed by Mary Kaldor, professor of Global Governance at the London School of Economics, captures the focus on peace for individuals and communities at the grassroot level, instead of conceiving security as defence of the state and its institutions. Conflict prevention in this context includes efforts to balance the demands of competing factions through a multilateral approach where universal human rights take precedence.
It is in this context that Cox’s Bazar is symptomatic of a unique scenario where the confluence of different cultures, religions and identities necessitates a strategy that caters to the needs of the larger population.
Besides food assistance, establishing a medium for communication among different factions is the key to accentuating bonhomie; ground level mediation involves participation of those who are at the margins. As noted in countries like Somalia, local peace conferences have brought together elders of various sub-clans, solidifying peace agreements. This was the foundational block to institutionalising the political framework that catered to the larger mass and in turn aided establishment of a framework for peace. In this process, public health or awareness programmes play a crucial role.
Integration, which includes training at the community level to recover from trauma and dealing with existing prejudices, contributes profoundly towards sustainable peace. Cox’s Bazar, therefore, at this juncture behoves substantial action at the margins involving varied populations. At every level, peaceful accommodation of communities can be ensured only by the involvement of grassroot actors. Therefore, the approach of human security is of utmost relevance.
Furthermore, focussing on the youth is pre-eminent not just as a contingency measure against pervasive threat of radicalisation, but to also leverage the potential and enhance self-reliance of the population.
At the multi-lateral decision-making level, we should focus on establishing mechanisms or systems to ensure peace at the ground level. Only then can we build a a pro-active strategy for steadfast integration of the population and ensuring a sustainable future.
(The writer is Senior Analyst, Global Risk Insights)