The plight of the Rohingya people has become one of the most protracted, yet most neglected, humanitarian crises worldwide. More than a million stateless Rohingyas have been in limbo in the Cox’s Bazar’s ‘temporary camp’ for six years, with no prospect of an end in sight.
However, a solution to the Rohingya crisis is gradually becoming clearer for those willing to see. At an international conference on the Rohingya Crisis held in Bangladesh in late August, a ‘vibe shift’ was evident in the negotiations.
For the first time, the conversation shifted away from aid flows and pledges, focusing instead on a permanent solution for the Rohingya people. The collapse of international aid funding, triggered by USAID’s sudden implosion, has had stark implications for those in Cox’s Bazar.
Earlier this year, US President Donald Trump moved to reshape US foreign aid by slashing contributions to the UN and significantly weakening the US Agency for International Development (USAID). The administration justified the cuts as a cost-saving measure while redirecting funds to expand domestic immigration enforcement.
The slash of monthly food rations from $12 to $6 for Rohingya people earlier this year has rendered even the most basic essentials out of reach.
It has brought one truth to focus: Stopgap aid cannot substitute for the necessity of lasting political solutions.
Importance of Rohingya voices
Wealthy nations can no longer just write cheques to address humanitarian crises in host nations.
Failing to negotiate a lasting solution for the crisis has not only let down the Rohingya and Bangladeshi people but has also weakened the idea of shared humanitarian responsibility.
The change in tone at the conference was not just prompted by what was lacking, but also by what became evident: For the first time, Rohingya voices were present at the negotiating table.
Their message to the world was that further aid pledges were pointless and that the only way to end the plight of the Rohingya was to return to Rakhine, their rightful homeland.
A new vision for the future of the Rohingya people is both necessary and achievable.
On Tuesday, at the UN General Assembly in New York, a high-level conference on the situation of the Rohingya Muslims will take place.
We cannot afford to miss this opportunity to push towards a long-term solution for the Rohingya people.
A logical first step would be to establish an ongoing commission that unites all the key stakeholders: the Rohingya themselves, Bangladesh, Myanmar, China, the United States, and UNHRC.
Discussions must not simply end after the UN conference; they must continue.
They could agree on a legally-binding timeline for the repatriation of the Rohingya people.
Clear and enforceable conditions must be set upon which the Rohingyas could return, including freedom from persecution, freedom of religion, access to employment, and guaranteed access to aid agencies. The UNHRC must monitor both these conditions and the timeline.
Beyond that, I suggest establishing a demilitarised development corridor in Rakhine.
Such a corridor should attract international investment to employ both the Rohingya and the local populations.
A Truth and Reconciliation Commission, modelled on those conducted after the end of South African apartheid, could start the process of rebuilding trust between communities.
Yet ultimately, such a commission would rely on power balancing between the US and China.
Given the current context, this would be quite an achievement.
Yet mutual interest may bring two parties to the table; stability in the Rakhine region protects Chinese investments in the Belt and Road Initiative.
Who benefits from a long-term solution?
Brokering a successful repatriation could boost Trump’s sought-after peacenik, deal-making credentials.
My home country, Bangladesh, has borne the weight of this humanitarian burden, yet this cannot continue indefinitely.
We grapple with our own economic and political instabilities as a result of the 2024 revolution. In the face of shrivelling international aid, supporting the Cox’s Bazar camps is simply not a long-term possibility for our nation.
Yet there are political wins on the table for other stakeholders, too. For China, prolonging instability in Rakhine State only invites further security challenges on its border.
Myanmar remains strategically crucial for China’s BRI, especially the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor.
Politically, resolving the crisis could provide China with a strong counter-narrative to Western criticism of human rights abuses, further boosting China’s image as the emerging global moral authority.
Keen to position himself as the dovish deal-maker, supporting long-term Rohingya repatriation could provide Trump with another opportunity to showcase leadership following his limited peace negotiations in Ukraine and Gaza.
It could also give some credibility to the view that artful deal-making could operate as a feasible alternative to the USAID ‘stopgap’ model that the Trump administration repudiates.
Equally, for Myanmar’s junta—the State Administration Council (SAC) —engaging meaningfully on the world stage could help shift its image away from being an international pariah and towards being a legitimate ruling body.
This could be used as an argument against further economic sanctions or for reducing existing ones, while also boosting diplomatic and economic ties with the USA, China and Bangladesh.
This is far from a zero-sum political game.
Slow and steady
The goal must be a steady and voluntary repatriation of the Rohingya refugees, backed by international guarantees of protection from persecution.
This should come with development incentives for the communities in Rakhine State, so that repatriation is seen as an opportunity for the local population, not a burden.
Repatriation could be a slow process. Yet slow progress is better than endless stagnation.
A managed, steady repatriation could ensure that cultural integration happens in a steady flow, not a sudden shock.
Myanmar’s population and authorities could recognise that repatriation is feasible. The Rohingya people will be able to see that a return home is possible.
The humanitarian crises in Sudan, Ukraine and Gaza may have overshadowed the Rohingya crisis.
However, a successful, multilateral solution for them could prove that international cooperation can still navigate complexity to arrive at a resolution.
If regional and international powers can come together to break the impasse at Bangladesh’s border, they may be emboldened to do the same elsewhere.
