Sami Hamdi: Bangladesh as the Architect of Rohingya Return

[retaxis]

You are looking at this through a lens of zero-sum conflict, but the most logical path forward is for Bangladesh and China to find common ground. The refugee crisis costs Bangladesh over $2 billion annually—a massive socioeconomic drain that is completely unsustainable. Dhaka is pursuing patient, diplomatic engagement because a peaceful, mediated settlement is in everyone's best interest.

We understand exactly how China manages Myanmar. Beijing doesn’t simply respect Myanmar's central sovereignty; it actively controls the geopolitical ecosystem by playing both sides. China funds, arms, and micro-manages massive Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) on its own northern border—like the United Wa State Army (UWSA) and the Three Brotherhood Alliance—using them as a "stick" to force the Myanmar Junta into submission whenever it hesitates on Chinese projects. When the junta steps out of line, Beijing greenlights rebel offensives; when the rebels get too aggressive, Beijing forces ceasefires and chokes their supply lines. You dictate peace and war along your border to protect your national interests.

Bangladesh is simply asking China to use that exact same leverage over the junta and the Arakan Army (AA) to resolve the western border crisis. We are not looking to disrupt China’s core interests. We recognize that the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC) and the Kyaukphyu deep-sea port are vital strategic assets for Beijing.

China must realize that forcing the AA and the junta to accept a managed Rohingya repatriation process specifically in the Naf River estuary and the Mayu River valley is completely safe for Chinese investments. Geographically, this border strip (encompassing Maungdaw and Buthidaung) is a distinct territorial pocket. It is entirely isolated from Kyaukphyu and the CMEC pipelines by massive natural barriers, including the rugged Mayu mountain range, deep river networks (Kaladan river), and vast physical distances. Stabilizing this small, localized border corridor does not touch a single square mile of China’s economic footprint.

Furthermore, anyone claiming China has a permanent chokehold over Bangladesh’s choices is miscalculating buyer power. We are the customer; we pay in cash. If China hesitates to act as a fair mediator, Bangladesh has the full capacity to shift its vast economic and raw material sourcing to Turkey, Pakistan, South Korea, Japan, ASEAN, and Western countries. We have already proven this agility by successfully diversifying over 50% of our apparel raw inputs to global suppliers.

The exact same decoupling is happening in our defense sectors. Everything from heavy artillery and combat drones (Bayraktar TB2) to modern naval strike capabilities can be—and is being—sourced entirely from the Turkey-Pakistan defense axis [TRG-300 ]. We are rapidly setting up our own domestic manufacturing complexes to secure long-term self-reliance. While our current fast-jet aviation relies on Chinese stopgaps like the J-10CE, that temporary dependence evaporates the moment Turkey's next-generation aerospace programs mature over the coming years—specifically the TAI KAAN fifth-generation stealth fighter and platforms powered by indigenous TF10000 engines.

Bangladesh prefers a stable, diplomatic solution mediated by Beijing because it preserves regional trade. But China must be reasonable: use your control over the junta and the AA to allow a peaceful return to Naf river estuary and Mayu river valley. It keeps our border secure and protects Chinese assets from future instability. Working with Dhaka is the pragmatic choice; the customer always has alternative options.

This is not kachin or Wa state, China has minimal influence on the other side of myanmar with the AA. At this moment you need to settle things with AA and not even the myanmar government can deal with them at the moment.

Nothing is going to change and outside powers are not interested in internal conflicts of myanmar. China does have influence on the government but when it comes to internal politics, china does not interfere as long as China interest is met. China doesnt meddle in other countries and only deal with the rebel states because they are directly on chinas border.

 

[rakib]

This is not kachin or Wa state, China has minimal influence on the other side of myanmar with the AA. At this moment you need to settle things with AA and not even the myanmar government can deal with them at the moment.

Nothing is going to change and outside powers are not interested in internal conflicts of myanmar. China does have influence on the government but when it comes to internal politics, china does not interfere as long as China interest is met. China doesnt meddle in other countries and only deal with the rebel states because they are directly on chinas border.

Lets say, ICJ verdict confirms genocide for Rohingya and a new UNSC resolution calls for a UN administered safe zone in Naf estuary and Mayu River valley, will China refrain from a veto and help convince Russia to refrain from a veto? US, UK and France will vote for such a resolution, as far as I know.

If UNSC resolution fails, the next option is UNGA 377A option, which is for a group of nations to create a safe zone by force or in cooperation with AA and/or Myanmar. What will be China's reaction in such a situation? AA has a positive incentive as it may create a no fly zone sanctuary for them.

 

[retaxis]

Lets say, ICJ verdict confirms genocide for Rohingya and a new UNSC resolution calls for a UN administered safe zone in Naf estuary and Mayu River valley, will China refrain from a veto and help convince Russia to refrain from a veto? US, UK and France will vote for such a resolution, as far as I know.

If UNSC resolution fails, the next option is UNGA 377A option, which is for a group of nations to create a safe zone by force or in cooperation with AA and/or Myanmar. What will be China's reaction in such a situation? AA has a positive incentive as it may create a no fly zone sanctuary for them.

I can't speak for China but we will have to see what happens. The government fake elections gave them a lot of credibility amoong ASEAN and the world and with everyone busy with their own issues, no one cares about minority groups in burma at present. Just look at Sudan where hundreds of thousands have been slaughtered and no one gives a crap or does anything let alone gaza. Only Bangladesh can try to discuss terms with AA at this stage and AA doesn't seem like an easy pushover either.

 

[LeonBlack08]

Bangladesh bears 100% of the responsibility for the Rohingya issue within its borders; it has nothing to do with other countries.

Really? Nothing to do with a genocidal regime killing and ethnically cleanse these people from their homeland. I think you are talking out of your depth.

Bangladesh's fault was not engaging in war with the Burmese to help push these people back. But that decision was a result of our military's preparedness due to years of neglect and political unwillingness to engage in a war.

Rohingya refugees have been creeping into Bangladesh since 1990s. The latest came to international attention because of the extent of it.

The fault lies with the Burmese alone for causing the issue in the first place.

 

[Michael]

Really? Nothing to do with a genocidal regime killing and ethnically cleanse these people from their homeland. I think you are talking out of your depth.

Bangladesh's fault was not engaging in war with the Burmese to help push these people back. But that decision was a result of our military's preparedness due to years of neglect and political unwillingness to engage in a war.

Rohingya refugees have been creeping into Bangladesh since 1990s. The latest came to international attention because of the extent of it.

The fault lies with the Burmese alone for causing the issue in the first place.

This issue needs to be broken down into two parts:
1. The Rohingya issue itself.
2. The issue of the Rohingya in Bangladesh.
I am referring here to the second issue. As for the conflict involving the Rohingya, the Myanmar government, the military, and the AA, that falls under the first issue.

When I state that this is 100% Bangladesh's responsibility, there are a few points to consider:

1. The official stance of the Bangladeshi government is that the Rohingya are refugees from Myanmar. From the perspective of general international understanding, they belong to the Burmese people. Although there is significant controversy regarding this matter within Myanmar itself, Bangladesh's official position remains that these individuals are from Myanmar.

2. In the international arena, while we call for humanitarian aid, there is a fundamental premise: the scope of such aid is limited to what we can afford to bear.

I say this is Bangladesh's responsibility because the country undertook something that was completely beyond its capacity. Then you'll have to bear the bitter consequences yourself. Looking at similar issues globally, nations handle refugees within the limits of their own capacity. When the challenge exceeds that capacity, they have no choice but to issue a regretful refusal. This is the reality of the international community.

The Rohingya issue within Bangladesh is now seriously affecting the country itself. Although Bangladesh has repeatedly appealed for assistance on the international stage, most nations have offered only verbal support, with hardly any truly willing to take concrete action. This is also the international reality.

Btw.
During the civil war in northern Myanmar a few years ago, a large number of Kokang people flooded into Chinese territory. This situation bore a striking resemblance to the Rohingya crisis involving Bangladesh.
The Kokang people are 100% ethnic Han Chinese and share deep ancestral ties with the people of China. They speak standard Chinese, use the Chinese yuan (RMB) and Chinese mobile communication networks, and even use Chinese textbooks in their schools. Yet, these Kokang refugees did not cause any disruption or negative impact on China.
This serves as an excellent model for resolving issues of this nature.


As for the first issue—"the Rohingya issue itself"—there are many differing interpretations. We cannot pass judgment on the rights and wrongs of history. Resolving such issues requires negotiation and compromise among all parties—or, alternatively, the total defeat and surrender of one side.