Background
The Rohingya crisis in Myanmar has become quite notorious over the past few weeks. Also known as the Rohingya insurgency, it has been started by the members of the local Muslim minority population as a response to continuous acts of violence and abuse toward them by Buddhist residents (BBC News 2015). The members of the Rakhnine Buddhist community, which is also located in the Rohingya region, have been attacking the Muslim community extensively in 2016-2017 (BBC News 2015).
While the specified aggression might seem unexpected at first, a closer look at the relationships between Rakhnine Buddhists and Muslims will reveal that the representatives of the identified cultures have been at odds since 1947, when the separatist movement was started among the members of the Muslim population to separate themselves from the Burmese population both culturally and geopolitically, resulting in numerous confrontations (BBC News 2015).
Placed in the identified perspective, the 2016-2017 conflict no longer seems unprecedented, yet it remains extremely violent and, thus, requires immediate actions aimed at stifling it and helping the opponents reconcile. The process of peace-making, however, cannot be started without the assistance of intermediaries, who do not seem to be too eager to help (Khan et al. 2016). Although not supporting the violence that the Buddhist population displays toward the Rohingya people, western states seem to alienate themselves from the specified problem. The unwillingness of the western community to assist the vulnerable population of Rohingya and contribute to further reconciliation seems odd and needs to be explored more.
Thus, a profound foundation for providing assistance to the members of the Rohingya community can be created, and the strategies for making the confrontation cease to exist can be designed. Furthermore, possible cultural issues can be addressed so that similar issues could be avoided in the future. At present, it is assumed that a combination of prejudices toward Muslim people, the economic challenges associated with supporting Rohingya refugees, and the fear of engaging in the situation that may turn out to be entirely unmanageable should be listed among the primary obstacles on the way to handling the conflict with the help of western states.
Indicative/Notional Argument
The crisis in Rohingya has become notorious over the past few years due to the intensity of the conflict and the deplorable state in which the vulnerable population of the country has found itself, as well as the lack of action for restraining the confrontation demonstrated by the global community, including influential states such as the USA, the members of the EU, etc. (Rohingya refugee crisis: impact on Bangladeshi politics 2017).
The conflict itself is rather complex, being rooted in the history of the Rohingya people and their relationships with the followers of the Buddhist philosophy (Kuperman 2013). Because of the specified conflict, the Myanmar government refused to grant the representatives of the Rohingya community with citizenship or recognize them as the members of the population whose needs and demands must be taken into account or represented by the government (Wheeler 2000). The results of the specified state policy are truly deplorable for the residents of Rohingya; particularly, apart from being ostracized and forced to become one of the most underprivileged communities, the Rohingya people have been facing the threat of violence and even death:
The massacre of the Rohingya people of Myanmar is the world’s first fully HD, live-streamed extermination. Our screens, emails, and WhatsApp chats are filled with footage of Myanmar’s security forces killing children, women being raped, people being brutally murdered, and bodies being disposed of. (Janmohamed, 2017, para. 1)
The identified problems have led to mass migrations of Rohingya people from Myanmar to neighboring states (Autesserre 2012). The migration levels have been rising exponentially over the past few months due to the lack of protection that the Myanmar government has offered to its Rohingya residents so far (BBC News 2017). The effects of illegal immigration have become especially explicit in Bangladesh, where the government is planning to legally restrict the number of immigrants
However, even with the obvious crisis that has been taking place in Rohingya over the past few months, the western countries that could have influenced the conflict and contribute to its faster resolution and even the possible reconciliation between the Rohingya residents and the members of the Buddhist community have done very little so far to handle the issue. It is assumed that the reasons for western countries to make little to no effort to stop the Rohingya conflict include the fact that the population affected by the conflict is far too numerous for any country to provide the Rohingya people with shelter.
Although assisting people that have been suffering from systematic abuse because of their cultural background is doubtlessly a noble deed, the economic effects of hosting so many refugees are bound to be drastic even for some of the wealthiest western states. Particularly, the necessity to provide the specified population with the necessary resources will imply that western countries will put themselves through a significant economic strain. Indeed, the increasingly high rates of unemployment that can be expected with the increase in the number of refugees from Myanmar, as well as possible cross-cultural conflicts between the members of the local population and the Rohingya refugees, the states in question are likely to experience the major negative consequence.
The case of Bangladesh, perhaps, serves currently as a graphic example of the side effects of offering Rohingya refugees a political shelter; according to a recent report, “The movement of hundreds of thousands of Rohingya into Bangladesh in a short period, driven by the cruel, sadistic Myanmar army, is causing grave damage to Bangladesh” (Cookson 2017, para. 1).
Theoretical Framing
Seeing that the unwillingness of western states to engage in the active process of managing the conflict may be dictated by a range of factors including economic, political, and cultural ones, it will be necessary to view the issue from several standpoints. To place the issue in perspective, one may need to choose the Functionalist perspective. Based on the key tenets of the identified framework, every social phenomenon contributes to its further development and serves as a building block in its structure (Slodkowski & Spetalnick 2017). While the Functionalist approach has its problems, such as the necessity to view crime as part and parcel of the societal development, it allows understanding the nature of social conflicts as inevitable outcomes of social imbalances.
However, apart from using the specified theoretical framework, one may also consider the modern conflict theory as the tool for understanding the nature of the problem, forecasting its further development, and designing the strategies for managing it successfully. The specified theoretical approach suggests that conflicts be viewed as the result of the misalignment between the interests of its sides, as well as the difference in their perspectives on allocating the available resources (Goldberg 2015).
The identified theoretical frameworks provide the foundation or an in-depth analysis of the causes of the conflict in Rohingya by exploring social, cultural, economic, and political factors that may have led to its development. Furthermore, the specified approaches allow exploring the available opportunities for addressing the problem and providing all parties involved with a satisfactory resolution. While the identified outcome does not seem plausible at present, both the functionalist perspective and the modern conflict theory will shed light on the strategies that can be used to manage the current Rohingya scenario successfully. Moreover, the tools for preventing similar occurrences in the future can be devised with the help of the specified frameworks.
Empirical Evidence
While there are currently no strong indications that the leading states are refraining from addressing the Rohingya conflict due to multiple negative implications of accepting refugees, there is evidence that the reasons behind the unwillingness of the identified stakeholders to intervene include possible economic and political effects that the specified steps will entail
It would be wrong to claim that the official representatives of the western states are the only stakeholders that engage in a rather controversial behavior in the specified conflict. Aung San Suu Kyi, an influential Burmese and Myanmar politician, has also been refusing from taking a side in the specified confrontation despite the fact that she currently represents the interests of a significant part of the state’s population (Safi 2017).
Indeed, according to the official statement made by the politician, shed not only strives to bring the sides of the conflict together as opposed to fuelling the confrontation but also believes that her ability to influence the problem is restricted to a considerable extent: “Suu Kyi may also believe that her ability to stop the brutal military campaign in Rakhine state is limited” (Kurlantzick 2017, para. 10).
The reasons for western states to react so inertly to the problem, therefore, may also be linked to the lack of activity displayed by the Burmese politicians such as Suu Kyi. In other words, the representatives of western states may believe that the situation cannot be helped to see that even local authorities fail to manage the problem and refrain from taking serious actions.
Analysis
When considering the factors that contribute to the further promotion of inaction among western countries as far as the situation in Rohingya is concerned, one must also mention the difference in the way in which the global community and the government of Burma see the situation. While the latter view the rebels as a troubled yet vulnerable community that is striving to protect the rights of its members, the Burmese government and, particularly, its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, consider the rebels to be dangerous separatists that may disrupt the safety and progress of the state, thus, contributing to its further untimely demise (Barkawi 2011). Indeed, according to Kalamur (2017), the intercultural conflict should be listed among the primary factors that contribute to the escalation of the Burmese conflict and the further increase of the divide between the opponents:
Where humanitarian groups and Western nations see the world’s most persecuted minority, the government of Burma (also known as Myanmar) and an overwhelming majority of its people see a foreign group with a separatist agenda, fueled by Islam, and funded from overseas. (para. 2)
Therefore, it can be assumed that cultural misunderstandings are the primary factors affecting the Western countries’ decision to refrain from taking any meaningful actions to address the Rohingya conflict. The Islamophobia that was spurred by the actions of Islamic extremists has been playing an important part in the design of the strategy with which Western states approach the Rohingya conflict.
However, cross-cultural conflicts should not be viewed as the only factor that contributes to the increase in the intensity of the political tension between the parties involved in the conflict. Apart from the fear of Islamic extremists, the convoluted political situation that can currently be observed in Myanmar can be deemed as one of the primary causes behind the current approach chosen by the Western states to handle the situation. Indeed, a closer look at the subject matter will reveal that the government of Myanmar has been disregarding the needs of all of its citizens no matter what ethnicity or culture they belong to, thus, warranting the name of a pariah state (Yakwoob 2017).
Therefore, Western countries have been under the impression that all residents of Myanmar have been experiencing oppression and that any citizen of the state could be persecuted for overstepping the boundaries set by the controversial political regime. Although the identified interpretation of the Burmese political environment cannot be considered appropriate, either, it has not been allowing identifying a specific demographic as a vulnerable population up until recently.
The lack of reaction from the members of the Burmese political parties, therefore, affects the attitude toward the situation on the global level. Particularly, seeing that no action is being taken by the members of Myanmar political parties, western states are likely to view the situation as entirely desperate and, which is even more important, potentially dangerous. Fearing that further intervention will affect their own economic and political well-being, western countries dismiss the opportunity to manage the problem. The specified attitude, however, comes at the price of thousands of lives since the Muslim community in Rohingya is affected by the violence that the rest of the population displays toward them (Wheeler 2000).
The observed phenomenon, in fact, aligns with the key principles of the Functionalist theory. Indeed, seeing that the social life in the Rohingya community has already been thrown out of balance because of the discrimination that its Muslim residents have been suffering, the current conflict must be viewed as an inevitable effect of the specified phenomenon., Furthermore, the lack of activity displayed by the western states can also be placed in the context of the Functionalist approach when considering the possible outcomes faced by the western countries in question after the intervention.
Since the latter implies a massive drop in the economic growth and major cross-cultural conflicts, the western states that could potentially affect the current situation in Rohingya and provide its Muslim residents with the required assistance refuse from taking risks that may negatively affect their own citizens.
For instance, the threat of increased unemployment rates among the citizens of western states due to the rise in the number of job applicants among refugees may be defined as the factor that serves as a restraining factor for western states when viewing the issue from the tenets of the modern conflict theory. Similarly, the fear of possible political implications and the threat to the western citizens’ safety due to a possible rise in the number of terrorist attacks is also a way of interpreting the western states’ unwillingness to act based on the principles of the modern conflict theory.
There is also evidence that the ethnic cleansing that is currently taking place in Rohingya may have financial underpinnings along with religious ones (Wheeler 2000). According to Sassen (2017), the current situation in Rohingya could have been created because of the military-economic interests of the Myanmar residents: “Expelling Rohingya from their land might well be good for future business. In fact, quite recently, the government allocated 1,268,077 hectares (3,100,000 acres) in the Rohingya area of Myanmar for corporate rural development” (Sassen 2017, par. 3).
The specified change in the Myanmar geopolitical situation is bound to affect the state positively since the new opportunities for agriculture-related activities will allow for a spur in economic growth (Wheeler 2000). The unwillingness of the western states to intervene, therefore, can be explained by the misinterpretation of the factors that have led to the conflict. Assuming that the problem is geared primarily be the religious disputes, the representatives of the western governments understandably view the issue far too delicate to be handled urgently and without due care.
Their failure to see the economic context in which the issue has been brewing, therefore, can be regarded as another explanation of their refusal to support the members of the Rohingya Muslim community and prevent further instances of violence and slaughter in the identified area. In fact, the identified assumption aligns with the tenets of the modern conflict theory described above, Seeing that the land of Rohingya is viewed as an important economic asset, it becomes the point at which the interests of the indigenous Burmese population and the local Muslim community collide.
Therefore, it could be assumed that the inaction of the western countries can be attributed to the lack of cultural insight, the fear of possible economic consequences of the active intervention, and the Islamophobic attitudes that have been building in the specified environment over the past few decades because of the terrorist attacks committed by Muslim extremists. Failing to see the difference between the latter and peaceful Muslim people, including the residents of Rohingya, western states refrain from taking actions to handle the situation and stop the acts of violence toward Rohingya people.
Possible Solution
Despite the fact that the situation which can be witnessed in Rohingya at present is extremely complicated, there are opportunities for convincing western states to provide the required support to the vulnerable population. For this purpose, campaigns aimed at raising awareness about the subject matter must be designed. Furthermore, the issue of Islamophobia must be addressed as one of the driving factors behind the unwillingness of western states to interfere with the Rohingya conflict.
As stressed above, there are reasons to assume that the threat of terrorism acts implemented by radical Muslim activists serves as a factor that prevents western states from taking actions. Therefore, it is crucial to promote a rise in the levels of awareness about the Muslim faith so that people could see the difference between a Muslim person and a member of a radical religious or political group who uses fear as a tool for attaining their goals.
Furthermore, the citizens of western states must also recognize the fact that considering all Muslim people terrorists is not only offensive to the identified population but also deleterious to the further development of cross-cultural relationships and engaging in the process of multicultural communication. As a result, western state authorities may be convinced to change their attitude toward the Rohingya crisis and provide the required support to the Muslim population experiencing violence and abuse from the local Buddhist groups.
Conclusion
The Rohingya crisis in Burma has become notorious over the past few decades and intensified significantly over the last couple of years. Facing a massive threat from the local Buddhist population, Muslims living in Rohingya require immediate support from the western states, yet very little help has been provided so far. The lack of response from the western community can be explained from the perspectives of the modern conflict theory and the Functionalist perspective.
Particularly, the unwillingness to engage in the political relationships that are potentially dangerous to the well-being of the citizens of the identified western states, coupled with a rise in Islamophobia levels and the fear of possible deleterious economic and financial outcomes, defines the choices made by western states so far. To handle the issue and compel the representatives of western governments to act, one will have to raise awareness about the prejudices that Muslim communities suffer, as well as the life-threatening situation in which the Rohingya Muslim community is at present. Thus, the opportunities for addressing the situation will be created.
Reference List
Autesserre, S 2012, ‘Dangerous tales: dominant narratives on the Congo and their unintended consequences,’ African Affairs, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-21.
Barkawi, T 2011, ‘From war to security: security studies, the wider agenda, and the fate of the study of war,’ Millennium-Journal of International Studies, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-16.
BBC News 2015, ‘Why is there communal violence in Myanmar?’. Web.
BBC News 2017, ‘Who will help Myanmar’s Rohingya?. Web.
Goldberg, R 2015. Understanding contemporary social problems through media, Routledge, New York, NY.
Janmohamed, S 2017, ‘Why does the world do nothing for the Rohingya?’, The National AE. Web.
Kalamur, K 2017, ‘The misunderstood roots of Burma’s Rohingya crisis,’ The Atlantic. Web.
Khan, MH, Islam, F, Chowdhury, NMRA, Masako, U, Chowdhury, SM, Delem, MD & Rahman, A 2016, ‘Maternal and newborn health situation of Rohingya migrants in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh’, Annals of Global Health, vol. 82, no. 3, pp. 429-430.
Kuperman, AJ 2013, ‘A model humanitarian intervention? Reassessing NATO’s Libya campaign’, International Security, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 105-136.
Kurlantzick, J 2017, ‘Why Aung San Suu Kyi isn’t protecting the Rohingya in Burma’, The Washington Post. Web.
Rohingya refugee crisis: impact on Bangladeshi politics. 2017. Web.
Safi, M 2017, ‘UN chief urges Myanmar to end violence as 120,000 Rohingya flee’, The Guardian. Web.
Slodkowski, A & Spetalnick, M 2017, ‘Exclusive: West edges towards punishing Myanmar army leaders over Rohingya crisis – sources’, Reuters. Web.
Wheeler, NJ 2000, Saving strangers: humanitarian intervention in international society, OUP Oxford, Oxford.
Yakwoob, S 2017, ‘The very least the UK owes the Rohingya is protection’, Al Jazeera. Web.