The lost Muslims of Myanmar

The refugee crisis that recently gripped South-east Asia has waned, as countries in the region have taken in thousands of the migrants who had been abandoned at sea by smugglers. But we can expect the problem to return when the monsoon season ends and Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar’s coastal Rakhine state once again flee persecution by the Buddhist majority. Governments need to work quickly to stem another exodus.

After all, the refugee problem in South-east Asia lends itself to resolution, unlike the one in the Middle East where civil wars show no signs of ebbing. Waves of Rohingyas have fled Myanmar before, only to return, albeit under less-than-ideal circumstances. The goal now must be to create conditions under which they can thrive at home.

While Naypyidaw bears primary responsibility for this task, the challenge transcends Myanmar. More than half the migrants rescued in May were Bangladeshis fleeing poverty. And the trafficking networks that exploit such migrants, often with the help of local officials and police, are based in Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia. Australia, which has been justly criticised for turning away refugee boats from its shores, should be helping its neighbours coordinate intelligence and information-sharing to disrupt these networks.

Would-be migrants turn to smugglers as they have no legal means of seeking work abroad. This is why all governments in the region should work out a more transparent guest-worker programme, either through ASEAN or bilateral labour agreements. Singapore, which has set up reasonably effective procedures for recruiting foreign labour and established a set of protections for them, provides a good model.

That said, Myanmar has a long way to go to improve the Rohingyas’ lot: They still do not have full citizenship, and thus lack the passports they would need to participate in any legal guest-worker programme. The Rohingyas’ roots are fiercely disputed, with some claiming they are indigenous to Rakhine and others insisting they migrated under the British during colonial times, if not more recently. Granting them political rights remains a third rail in Myanmar, and will only become more so in the months leading up to elections this autumn. But the government can do more to lay the groundwork for change.

As some Myanmar officials have suggested, countries around the world could help by contributing to the development of Rakhine. Most outside aid is spent on humanitarian relief for the Rohingyas who were displaced by riots in 2012. Donors could build much more goodwill by investing in health and development projects that benefit Buddhists as well as Muslims. The money could be offered with strings attached, including a requirement that Rohingya migrants who have been violently driven from their homes and farms be allowed to return. For its part, the Burmese government needs to do more to tone down the controversy over whether Rohingyas should be made citizens. Moderates on both sides should, for example, move to abandon the useless debate over whether the people should even be called “Rohingyas” or whether they should be referred to instead as “Bengalis”. Indeed, the hate speech from some high-profile Buddhist leaders has been tolerated too long.

Ms Aung San Suu Kyi’s reluctance to speak out in defence of the Rohingyas may be understandable ahead of the elections. But as she herself has noted, another outbreak of anti-Rohingya violence in Rakhine could well disrupt the vote. It is in her and her supporters’ interests to tamp down anti-Muslim prejudice now, rather than store up problems for the next government, which her party is expected to dominate. By now, it should be clear — to Ms Suu Kyi no less than to Myanmar’s leaders — that the alternative would be tragic. Bloomberg