James Lalrinchhana, the deputy commissioner (DC) of Champhai district which shares a border with Myanmar’s Chin state, told PTI that an intense gunfight broke out between Myanmar’s ruling junta-backed forces and militia group People’s Defence Force (PDF) on Sunday evening.

The fighting reportedly started after the PDF attacked two military bases at Khawmawi and Rihkhawdar in Chin state near the Indian border, he said, adding that the fighting continued till Monday. Over 2,000 people from Khawmawi, Rihkhawdar and the neighbouring villages in Chin crossed over to India and took shelter in Zokhawthar in Champhai district due to the gunfight, Lalrinchhana said.

The Myanmar military base at Rihkhawdar was taken over by the militia in the early hours of Monday, November 13, and the base at Khawmawi was also taken over by them in the afternoon, he said.

In retaliation, the Myanmar army launched airstrikes on Khawimawi and Rihkhawdar villages on Monday, he said reported The Telegraph..

At least 17 people injured in the gunfight were brought to Champhai for treatment, Lalrinchhana said. The newspaper reported that a 51-year-old civilian from Myanmar who was already living in Zokhawthar died when the gunfight was happening on the other side of the border, the DC said.

Local sources said he was allegedly hit by a stray bullet from across the border. Besides, Zokhawthar Village Council president Lalmuanpuia told PTI that five personnel of the Chin National Army (CNA), which was a part of the PDF, were killed in the gunfight.

Lalmuanpuia said that more than 6,000 people from Myanmar were already living in Zokhawthar before the gunfight started.

Six districts of the state — Champhai, Siaha, Lawngtlai, Serchhip, Hnahthial and Saitual — share a 510-km-long border with Myanmar’s Chin state.

The first influx from the neighbouring country happened in February 2021 when the junta seized power. Since then, thousands of people from Myanmar have taken shelter in the northeastern state.

According to the state Home Department, 31,364 Myanmar nationals are currently living in different parts of the state. The majority of them live in relief camps, while others are accommodated by their local relatives and some live in rented houses.

The Myanmar nationals taking shelter in Mizoram are from the Chin community, who share ethnic ties with the Mizos.

Related:

J&K HC directs UT administration to identify and list all “illegal migrants” from Myanmar and Bangladesh

Killing by Hunger: Rohingya Muslims starved after Cyclone Mocha in Rakhine state, UN denied access: Myanmar

The post 2,000 refugees from Myanmar cross over to India as intense gunfight rock Chin state appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy: The Hindu

Ever since anti-Rohingya violence broke out in Myanmar, over 1 million people have fled their homes and sought refuge across the world. While the largest number of Rohingya refugees still live in Cox Bazaar in one of the world’s largest refugee camps, many have been granted the opportunity to stay in India. They have been rehabilitated in rehabilitated in Jammu, Hyderabad, Delhi NCR, Haryana and Rajasthan. Rohingyas have faced violence in three waves in 1978, 1991-92 and 2015 and are one of the largest ethnic groups in the world to face relentless persecution and displacement.

However, in wake of the Indian government’s decision to deport them back to Myanmar, where many people fear they will meet violence persecution and certain death, two Rohingya men moved court. The grounds for the petitions were the Indian commitment “to protect the life and liberty of every human being, whether citizen or not.” The petitions argue that deportation would violate India’s commitment to international conventions that recognise ‘Principle of Non-Refoulement’ i.e custom against deporting refugees to a country where they face a threat to their lives. According to their petitions 40,000 Rohingya were registered and recognised by the UNHCR in 2016 and granted refugee identity cards.

Senior Counsel Colin Gonsalves who appeared for one of the petitioners submitted that 60-70 percent of the Rohingya in India had already been given refugee cards and the rest were pending determination. However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta insisted that it was important to decide if illegal immigrants can be granted refugee status before stopping the proposed deportation and allowing them community rights under the international law.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and justice Aniruddha Bose were hearing the cases. The SC has agreed to examine the issue and the case has been adjourned to August.

The entire order may be read here: 

The post Rohingya deportation case: SC to examine key question on refugee status appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Record-breaking years for refugee flows have become the norm. UNHCR, the United Nations Refugee Agency, just released its annual tally of displacement worldwide. Once again the numbers rose, with 70.8 million people displaced by conflict and violence — more than at any point since the Second World War.

Displaced Yemeni girls, who fled their home because of fighting at the port city of Hodeida, are seen in a school allocated for IDPs in Sanaa, Yemen. (AP Photo/Hani Mohammed)

In media coverage on refugees, we hear the most about the small fraction of refugees who manage to reach Europe or North America, yet well over half of the displaced — some 41.3 million —never make it out of their own countries.

This invisible majority is known by the uninspired acronym of IDPs, or “internally displaced persons.” In countries like Syria, South Sudan, Myanmar and Nigeria, IDPs face targeted violence and extreme poverty, but because they remain within their own borders, they receive little attention or effective international support.

It’s time to change that, and Canada must help.

No coherent strategy

While Canada prides itself for its history of leadership in support of refugees, we lack a coherent, ambitious strategy to strengthen protection and assistance for the majority of displaced people who remain inside their own countries.

Our efforts have focused on comparatively small numbers of refugees by considering the asylum claims of those who arrive at our borders, and resettling refugee families from camps and over-strapped host communities in developing countries.

As UNHCR reported, Canada is now the top resettlement country, resettling 28,100 refugees in 2018 —but that’s only 0.0004 per cent of those displaced worldwide. We reach larger numbers by funding groups such as UNHCR. However, these agencies primarily assist refugees who have crossed international borders, doing little for the majority who are uprooted within their own states.

An improved Canadian response to the challenge of internal displacement could be based on three key pillars: leadership, resources and solutions.

Leadership

Theoretically, leadership in responding to IDPs’ needs and protecting their rights should come from their own governments. In places like Syria and Myanmar, however, IDPs are more hunted than helped by their governments. This means that international officials must step in to address unmet needs.

We need a high-level flagbearer for IDPs, who can work at the international level to advocate for IDPs’ rights, encourage improved government policies and promote effective, co-ordinated responses to IDPs from UN agencies, NGOs and donors.

UNHCR plays this role for refugees who have sought shelter outside the countries, but for IDPs, the UN has only a solitary volunteer expert —an arrangement farcically unsuited to the scale of the challenge. Canada should push for the prompt appointment of a new, prominent, full-time representative of the UN Secretary-General on IDPs, with a fully staffed office dedicated to strengthening responses to internal displacement in cooperation with agencies like the UNHCR.

Systematic & strategic resource distribution

Inequitably distributed resources are also a major barrier to effective responses to IDPs. As a major humanitarian and development donor, Canada should review its aid for IDPs, and prepare a policy to ensure more systematic, strategic support for IDPs, bridging emergency humanitarian relief and longer-term development interventions.

It should also spearhead a broader effort with other donor countries to improve responses to internal displacement.

Children moving a bag of grain through the mud with a wheelbarrow from a food distribution through the United Nations’ Malakal Camp for Internally Displaced People in South Sudan. (AP Photo/ Matthew Abbott)

At a time when aid budgets are already stretched tight, it is hard to hear that more funding is needed. But the reality is that IDP situations are chronically underfunded, with dramatically less spent in support of IDPs compared to refugees facing similar challenges.

This lack of support means that many who would prefer to remain closer to home to tend their crops, safeguard their businesses or care for sick family members have little choice but to make dangerous journeys to seek shelter abroad. It also means that those without the money or physical ability to flee their countries are left high and dry.

To be clear, there is no substitute for refugees’ right to seek asylum. Increased aid for IDPs does not mean that borders can be closed or refugees turned away.

Rather, this is about better responding to the complexity of massive displacement situations in which some people will need shelter outside their countries as refugees, while others may be unable to leave. IDPs should not be sidelined simply because they remain inside their own countries.

Resolving displacement

Finally, we need to refocus on solutions to internal displacement. Canada must co-operate with other donors, governments and UN agencies to promote more comprehensive and systematic support for all those who are struggling to find a solution to their displacement.

From Colombia to the Congo, displacement — internal and cross-border — drags on for longer and longer periods as those forced to flee are unable to safely return or find acceptance elsewhere.

Yet in 2017, over six million IDPs attempted to return to their homes, despite ongoing instability. Many received no support from aid agencies or governments, undermining their ability to return and rebuild. At the same time, thousands of refugees who have repatriated to countries such as Afghanistan have subsequently been internally displaced because they’ve been unable to reclaim their lost homes and re-establish their livelihoods, or have faced violence in their communities.

We must do more to increase the odds that these movements are safe and sustainable.

Forced migration can seem like an insurmountable challenge as displacement rates keep climbing and words of welcome are drowned out by calls to seal up borders and slash aid budgets.

Building on our track record of support for refugee resettlement, we can make progress by standing up for those uprooted within their own countries, creating a broader and stronger response for the millions of refugees and IDPs unable to reach our shores.

Courtesy: The Conversation

The post Canada must step up to help millions displaced inside their own countries appeared first on SabrangIndia.

True, several European leaders, including Italy’s Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, went home to speak triumphantly of a ‘great victory’, achieved through a supposedly united European position.

Italy’s Interior Minister, Matteo Salvini, used more derogatory terms in explaining his country’s new policy on refugees and migrants.  “They will only see Italy on a postcard”, he said, referring to refugees who have been arriving in Italy with the help of humanitarian rescue boats.

The first of these boats, carrying over 600 refugees and economic migrants, the Aquarius, was sent back on June 11, followed by another, carrying over 200 refugees. When Italy carried out what then seemed like excessive action, the decision erupted into a massive political controversy between Italy, France, Spain, Malta and others.

However, the pandemonium has subsided since then, as Italy’s Conte declared that, following the Brussels summit, his country ‘is no longer alone.’

What Conte, who presides over a populist, right-wing government, meant is that his country’s unwelcoming attitude towards refugees is now gathering greater European consensus.

The debate over refugees and migrants has reached the point that it has become a source of political instability in countries like Germany. The latter is not considered a ‘frontline state’, as in countries that are likely to be the first destination for refugees escaping war or poverty at home.

Austria and other countries are also caught up in the crisis, each with its own angry constituency to appease.

On paper, representatives of European countries did, in fact, reach an agreement. The real problem ensued as soon as delegations returned to their respective countries.

Despite opposition from Poland and Hungary, and Italian threats to ‘veto’ any text that is not consistent with Italian priorities, the Council agreed on four main points:

First, the establishment of disembarkation centers outside European territories, to be stationed mostly in North Africa. At that early stage, economic migrants would be separated from political asylum seekers.

This first stipulation is made hollow simply because, as the Guardian reports, “no North African country has agreed to host migrant centers to process refugee claims,” in the first place.

Second, Europeans agreed to strengthen borders control through the Frontex system.

Aside from the questionable tactics of this pan-European border police, this system has been in use for years and it is difficult to imagine how ‘strengthening’ it will translate into a more efficient or humane border control system.

Third, the Council called for the creation of ‘controlled’ refugee and migrant processing centers within Europe itself, like the North African non-existing centers, to quickly separate between refugees fleeing strife and economic migrants.

This clause was offered as a ‘voluntary’ step to be exercised by any state as it sees fit, which, again, will hardly contribute to a united European policy on the issue. Yet, despite the voluntary nature of this provision, it still stirred a political controversy in Germany.

Soon after the Council issued its final statement, Horst Lorenz Seehofer, Germany’s Interior Minister, threatened to quit Angela Merkel’s coalition government.

The German Chancellor is now under dual pressure, from within her fractious coalition, but also from without, a massive political campaign championed by the far-right party, the ‘Alternative for Germany’. In fact, the latter group’s popularity is largely attributed to its anti-immigrant sentiment.

A compromise was reached, calling for the establishment of migrant ‘transit centers’ at the German-Austrian border. However, instead of resolving a problem, the decision created another one, propelling a new controversy in Austria itself.

Austria, which also has its own populist, anti-immigrant constituency to placate, fears that the proximity of the German ‘transit centers’ would force it to receive Germany’s unwanted refugees.

“If Berlin introduced national measures, which would have a chain reaction, it could mean that Austria would have to react,” Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz commented in a press conference. The magnitude of this ‘reaction’ is, of course, to be determined later, depending on the nature of counter-pressure emanating from Austria itself.

Austria has, in fact, already threatened to shut down the Brenner Pass, connecting Italy and Austria.

The fourth, and last, decision by the European Council called for the boosting of North African economies and offering training for Libya’s coastguard.

As altruistic as the last stipulation may sound, it is, indeed, the most ridiculous, especially since it was placed on the agenda with French enthusiasm. Even if one is to ignore France’s colonial history in Africa – grounded in the notion of usurping African resources under military threat – one can hardly ignore the current role that Emmanuel Macron is playing in the current Libyan conflict.

Various media reports suggest that Macron’s government is carrying on with the legacy of intervention, initiated by the government of Nicolas Sarkozy, most notably in the military intervention of March 2011.

Libya, a failed state par excellence, is now fighting proxy wars in which France and Italy are the main players.

Bearing that in mind, it would be absurd to suggest that Macron is keen on respecting the sovereignty and supporting the economies of Libya and other North African nations.

Considering Europe’s past failures and foot dragging on the issue of refugees, it is hard to imagine that one of Europe’s greatest challenges is to be resolved as a result of the Brussels summit and its lackluster ‘agreement’.

Europe continues to view the refugee crisis in terms of security, populist pressures and national identity, as opposed to it being a global humanitarian crisis invited by wars, political strife and economic inequality. of which Europe is hardly innocent.

As long as Europe continues to operate with a skewed definition of the crisis, the crisis will continue to grow, leading to far dire consequences for all of those involved.

(Romana Rubeo, an Italian writer contributed to this article)

– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of Palestine Chronicle. His latest book is ‘The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story’ (Pluto Press, London). Baroud has a Ph.D. in Palestine Studies from the University of Exeter and is a Non-Resident Scholar at Orfalea Center for Global and International Studies, University of California Santa Barbara. His website is www.ramzybaroud.net. 

Courtesy: https://countercurrents.org/

The post Europe’s Iron Curtain: The Refugee Crisis is about to Worsen appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Photo by BULENT KILIC/AFP via Getty Images

India is one of the few democracies in the world that is not a signatory to both the Refugee Convention and the Protocol. This is very unfortunate and certainly beyond comprehension. India has a track record of hosting millions of refugees from the neighbouring countries and even from some African ones. Thanks to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and her Government in May 1971, India provided refuge to more than ten million Bangla Deshis, in the wake of the civil war there. Today, besides the many Bangla Deshis who have continued to stay on, there are thousands of Tibetans, Sri Lankan Tamils, Afghanis, and Rohingyas from Myanmar, Bhutanese from Nepal and even from Sudan, Somalia and other sub- Saharan African countries who have sought refuge in India.

The refugee crisis has gripped the world as never before! Sometime ago, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) pegged the number of refugees, asylum-seekers and internally displaced people around the world as 65.3 million. This means that one in every 113 people on earth has now been driven from their home by war, persecution, human rights violations or climate change (which is erroneously and conveniently referred to as ‘natural disasters’). To put it more graphically each minute about 24 people around the world have to flee their home for no fault of their own. With the escalation of violence in several countries like Yemen, DRC, South Sudan, northeast Nigeria and  that more than 20 million people are affected across Africa because of war, drought and hunger- the actual figures of refugees and the displaced might be much more.
More than half of the refugees (53%) today come from just three countries: Syria (4.9m), Afghanistan (2.7m) and Somalia (1.1m). Strangely enough and contrary to public perception the countries which host the most amount of refugees today are Turkey(2.5m), Pakistan(1.6m),Lebanon(1.1m), Iran(979,400), Ethiopia(736,100) and Jordan(664,100).

Sadly xenophobia, jingoism, exclusiveness, racism, discrimination is also on the rise. This prompted the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to recently condemn “aggressive nationalism” in western democracies and called for greater social cohesion saying that, “It is essential to not just address the humanitarian crises, but to build resilience – of populations, of regions and countries – to create the conditions for those humanitarian crises not to be repeated.” Speaking about refugees he says, “I’ve met so many who have lost so much. But they never lose their dreams for their children or their desire to better our world. They ask for little in return-only our support in their time of greatest need.”

Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) are often conveniently forgotten. A recently published report of the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (of the Norwegian Refugee Council) states that, “more than 31 million people- one every second- were uprooted in their home country in 2016 because of conflicts and disasters, and numbers will grow unless the underlying causes like climate change and political turmoil are tackled.”. The added woes of the IDPs that unlike refugees who seek asylum in other countries, they are unable to claim any international protection since they remain in their own country.

IDPs in India could easily run into a mind-boggling figure. Communal and caste violence in several parts of the country, the construction of mega-projects by powerful vested interests and even by Government, perennial famines, floods and other ‘natural’ disasters have displaced hundreds of thousands all over the country(the oustees of the Narmada Dam area and those displaced by the Gujarat Carnage of 2002 are recent examples). Most of those affected are the poor and vulnerable like the adivasis, dalits and minorities. The official response to the plight of IDPs is criminally pathetic.

The military- industrial complex profits greatly from wars and conflicts all over. India’s budgetary outlay for arms and ammunition puts into shade the much needed expenditure for the social sector. The global refugee crisis is bound to continue as long as countries like the US continue to produce arms and ammunition and sell them to countries like Saudi Arabia. Recently US and Saudi Arabia signed an arms deal of $110 billion. Saudi Arabia is well known for its human rights violations and for fomenting terrorism (the US conveniently forgets that those mainly behind the 9/11 attacks were the Saudis).Sadly, there is no international outrage condemning such arms deal.

Minority communities are most affected by war and persecution. According to a recent UN report, Myanmar’s forces and the majority Buddhist community have committed mass killings and gang rapes against the Rohingya community. Although they have lived in Myanmar for more than two centuries, this Muslim minority is not among those officially recognised by the authorities there. Stateless, rejected and persecuted, in recent months tens of thousands of them have fled to neighbouring Bangladesh, where they are crammed into shanty settlements and live terrible lives.

World Refugee Day, will once again be observed on June 20th ‘to honour the courage, strength and determination of women, men and children who are forced to flee their homeland under threat of persecution, conflict and violence’. It may continue to be yet another cosmetic observance unless the world wakes up urgently to the endemic causes, which create forcible displacements and ultimately refugees.

Many refugees and displaced are also subject to torture, both in India and in other other countries. Article 3 of the UN Convention Against Torture (UNCAT)states, ‘No state party shall expel, return (refouler) or extradite a person to another state where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.’ June 26^th is observed as the UN ‘International Day in Support of Victims of Torture’. India has still not ratified the UNCAT.

In June 2016, the UNHCR launched a global campaign #WithRefugees demanding that world leaders and governments work together and do much more for refugees. There is certainly much more to be done! A wake up call for all particularly for India to ratify the Refugee Convention and Protocol and UNCAT! We must stand with the refugees and the displaced now!

 
* (Fr Cedric Prakash sj is a human rights activist and is currently based in Lebanon and engaged with the Jesuit Refugee Service(JRS) in the Middle East on advocacy and   communications.
Contact cedricprakash@gmail.com )             
 
 

The post India must Honour it’s Commitments, Stand with Refugees & Displaced: World Refugee Day, June 20 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The demonstrations came after the Rakhine Advisory Commission, led by former UN chief Kofi Annan, urged Myanmar’s government to reconsider the ethnic group’s legal status. The government actually does not recognise the existence of Rohingya and rather considers them as Bengali.

Stripped of their basic rights, community members have been submitted to extreme violence and atrocities in Myanmar. More than 87,000 people have been displaced since October. For years now, many have fled to neighbouring countries such as Bangladesh, where they live a life in limbo.
State counsellor Aung Saan Suu Kyi has thus far remained silent on the issue.
 

Bangladesh has some 32,000 registered refugees in two official camps located mainly in the Cox’s Bazar district bordering the eastern Rakhine State. An additional 200,000 to 500,000 unregistered refugees live in makeshift camps there, alongside locals.

Having faced a continuous flow of Rohingya refugees for over two decades, the Bangladesh government is now planning to relocate the refugees to a remote island in Noakhali district, Thengar Char, about 250 km northwest of current camps.

The government says the move would improve refugees’ access to humanitarian assistance. But Rohingya refugees reportedly oppose the plan, and human rights groups have urged the government to cancel the plan, which the Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network has declared to be “dangerous, absurd and inhumane”. Rights groups argue that the island is uninhabitable: it rose from the sea only 11 years ago and is highly prone to flooding and cyclones.
 

Local integration

The Bangladeshi people of Cox’s Bazar and the Rohingya refugees share a common dialect and culture. As a result, law enforcement forces cannot always differentiate between refugees and locals. Despite restrictions on their ability to work, many refugees find employment in the informal sector, and some children go to local schools. The government has reluctantly allowed the refugees to stay so far, but it is clearly concerned that such opportunities will lead to integration.

Thengar Char is a remote island in the most literal sense. The nearest sub-district office, Hatiya, is two hours away by boat. The surrounding areas are poor and underdeveloped.

For the government, it is easier to manage a refugee population that is concentrated on Thengar Char. Locals there do not speak the same dialect as Rohingyas, decreasing the potential for integration. It will also be practically impossible for them to seek employment and education outside the camp.

Challenges for humanitarian agencies

But the relocation would also make it very difficult for the UNHCR/UN Refugee Agency International Organisation for Migration and local NGOs to provide humanitarian services. Currently, agencies are mainly based in Cox’s Bazar, a popular Bangladeshi tourist destination with the longest sea-beach in the world. It is well connected to Bangladesh and other parts of the world by land and air and offers staff the comforts of living in a city, including basic facilities and security.
 

Thengar Char, on the other hand, is an exceptional place in overpopulated Bangladesh: it has no human settlement. Villagers who live nearby complain of pirates roaming the nearby waters, stealing goods and holding people hostage. The area’s security risks and remoteness may discourage humanitarian agency staffers from relocating there.
 

Possibilities of a human catastrophe

The Bangladesh forest department has warned that the Thengar Char island is not yet suitable for human habitation, writing in a letter that:
 

The soil and environment of Thengar Char is not yet suitable for human settlement. The island is submerged in water during monsoon. Though it emerges during dry season, most of the island goes under water at high tide.
 

Cyclone are of significant concern. According to a catalogue of tropical storms in Bangladesh, 193 cyclones struck the country between 1484 and 2009. Arguably the deadliest tropical cyclone in history hit the region in 1970, battering the coast with a six-metre storm surge and killing some 300,000 people. If even a small-scale cyclone hits the proposed Rohingya camp, a human catastrophe is nearly certain.

The Noakhali district administration has written that the government would also have to “build flood protection embankment, cyclone centres and necessary infrastructure and ensure supply of drinking water” before receiving the Rohingyas in the Thengar Char.
 

Lost connections

For the Rohingyas, current border camps in Cox’s Bazar are close to home not just culturally but also geographically. For some, crossing into Bangladesh is as easy as wading through a little creek on foot or taking a short boat trip.

When Myanmar erupts in violence, many Rohingyas seek safety in Bangladesh, and, when it ends, some of them head back home. There is usually no asylum application, refugee-status determination procedure or UN-assisted voluntary repatriation; registration was last done in 1992. The country’s hundreds of thousands of unregistered Rohingya migrants live in limbo, as Bangladesh lacks specific refugee laws.
 

During relative peace, many Rohingyas also cross the border to seek medical treatment, education, marriage, daily shopping trips, or to visit relatives. Some will embark on a secondary migration, heading to Saudi Arabia or Malaysia. Many of these practices likely violate Bangladeshi law, but they are locally accepted and have been going on for generations.

Newly arrived refugees or migrants often get shelter and other assistance from relatives already living in Bangladesh’s camps. Many refugees in the camp also act as bridge between Rohingyas living in Myanmar and the diaspora of approximately one million others who live around the world.
 

Indirect force for repatriation?

Bangladesh has been negotiating with Myanmar to repatriate the Rohingyas. Many Rohingyas in Bangladesh have expressed their willingness to go back to their homeland if state authorities can ensure their safety.

However, the risk of persecution and violence in Myanmar remains high, and most refugees do not consider it safe there. International law requires that the Bangladeshi government only send back refugees who would voluntarily repatriate.

If the alternative to life in Myanmar is banishment to Thengar Char, many Rohingyas might “agree” to return rather than face a dangerous and uncertain future on a remote island of Bangladesh.

Ashraful Azad, Assistant professor, International Relations, University of Chittagong

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

The post Banishing refugees to a flood-prone island will not solve Bangladesh’s Rohingya refugee crisis appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It was raining ferociously when we reached our hotel somewhere between Mcleodganj and Dharamkot on the evening of the fourth of July. We advised ourselves to stay indoors. You don’t step out on a rainy night in a terrain you don’t understand. My partner and I had settled for the TV show Durrels (based on the story of Lawrence Durrel’s family when they were in Greece) on our laptop that evening and decided to stay mostly indoors with some Momos and Thukpa (regular urban predictions). The large windows in our room and the precarious looking balcony opened to wild and dark clouds.  Behind them were the giant and magical mountains we were to explore next few days. This was meant to be a quiet holiday. The plan was to walk, trek, lounge in cafes and meditate in motion. My partner insisted I practice Wing-Chun with him. Mostly happily and sometimes not so happily, I trained with him.

Credit: Rukmini Sen

Suresh, however had some work to finish on the second day. After a large breakfast he settled in front of his laptop for the first few hours of the day. We were to meet after four hours in Mcleodganj.  The walk down the Dharamkot road is serene. Slightly slushy and slippery during the rains, but quiet nevertheless. I met old and young monks on my way down and up. Many of them were women. All the monks were in maroon robes. They looked at me, smiled and acknowledged me whenever I did the same. There were few other people on the hilly road. I clicked random photographs. Mostly of the colourful Buddhist flags.  I noticed a monk who helped a woman with a child and then he walked alone. He rested for a while alone.  Then he climbed up the road again.

Once in the mall road of Mcleodganj I decided to treat myself to some Kombucha (fermented and sweetened black or green tea good for digestion). I was very thirsty by now. So I entered this coffee shop which had many books. Once inside I skipped the books and headed towards their balcony full of bright red, pink and orange flowers. The balcony had stairs that, quite like a maze, took you to another part of the same coffee shop. This part was an open terrace. The owner of the coffee shop was friendly and political. We talked about Tibet and how Tibetans feel in Dharamshala. This conversation came back to me a few days later when a student of Buddhism became our guide at the Norbulinka monastery. He told us how most Indians were nice and curious. However, another Indian tourist was very unhappy with him because there were many dogs in the monastery. The tourist had told our young guide to go back to Tibet as according to him the Tibetans knew nothing about how a spiritual place should be kept. This student while narrating this story smilingly said “I told him we didn’t get these dogs from Tibet. This is their home”. He added that the rude tourist’s wife had smiled when he had said that.
 

Credit: Rukmini Sen

At Men-Tse-Khang which is the Tibetan Medical and Astro Institute, the Astro experts advise their clients to feed fish, dogs and animals along with poor people to resolve many life issues. For instance you may be advised to feed fish and dogs if you feel very lazy and tired.  Tibetan Buddhists clearly believe that inner harmony is possible if we also look outside and create harmony with fellow living beings not just human beings. The dogs thus are very happy in the monasteries. They are loved and fed well. None of them are, however, fat like some of the street dogs in Mumbai. May be they don’t eat plastic accidently like the animals in Mumbai.

I have wondered since that conversation with our young guide why the friendly dogs in Norbulinka had disturbed a tourist. We don’t know where the man came from and what values made him hate dogs so much! Or was it not the dogs? It was perhaps humans he didn’t understand. What makes people so sure of their own likes and dislikes? And then what is this stubborn faith that makes people hateful? What kind of values, faith and fears makes people dislike their guests?

I shudder at the thought of being a refugee, of living in exile. No community wants to migrate in such huge numbers till there is fear of life and wellbeing. Not the Buddhists of Tibet, not the Rohingya Muslims of Burma and Bangladesh, not the Bangladeshi Muslims, not the Hindus of Kashmir, not the Hindus and Sikhs of Pakistan, not the Jews of Germany.

Credit:Rukmini Sen

Buddhism, Harmony, living in exile and the free association with these words made me ruminate how the privileged travel, commute and immigrate easily and legally. The privileged can improve their state of being by legally crossing borders of state/province and nation states. However, the poor are viewed as illegal immigrants in case of national borders or an unwanted immigrant if s/he travels in his/her own country.

The poor have no right to cross borders and dream of a better life especially if s/he is not a political community another nation state can benefit from. Our young guide, a trained engineer is now studying Buddhist philosophy on his mother’s insistence. He was born in India and still belongs nowhere or so he felt when he was asked to go back to a land he knows very little about by an absolute stranger. In my many conversations in cafes, shops, meditation centres I heard people talk of their gratitude to India while they shared their pain when a few people treated them with anger and disdain.

There are different reasons given at different times to stop poor from migrating. Demography, shortage of resources, criminal leanings, religion of violence etc. We all tend to forget that our ancestors must have migrated many times, that most of our ancestors migrated from Africa! We are the same people!

I chanced upon a poetry book called SONGS OF THE ARROW by Bhuchung D. Sonam in one of the coffee shops.

He like many other Tibetans has dogs in his narrative. He is a rebel poet of sorts. Someone who denounces the middle path in his work of art. The pain of being in exile is evident.

Credit:Rukmini Sen
 
A poet’s heart must ask questions. One that needs special mention here goes somewhat like this-

A FAT DOG
My name is Migyur
I am a Fat Dog
Barking from a kennel
On a borrowed land
I am witless, shameless, gutless
But I am in charge of
This dog operation
 
Listen
My name is Migyur
I like to wag my tail
To eat all of the time
To work the least of the time
And think none of the time
I am stupid, inspid and a puppet
But I am a fat dog
And that is enough
 
My name is Migyur
I am a fat dog
Growling from my arm chair
To all other dogs
The homeless, stateless, boneless
Tails tucked between their legs
“Don’t think just bark” I order
They listen because
I am a big fat dog
 
My name is Migyur
I am a fat dog
I don’t care about
Ther fangs, bangs, gangs
But I don’t like their minds
Stirring up things
Creating chaos
Bringing change
They want a revolution
My foot! Should have said- my paw!
 
I am a fat dog
I am in charge
I give orders
Get used to me or get out!

Credit:Rukmini Sen

Sonam, the poet in exile also questions the middle path as expounded by Mahayana school of Buddhists. HH Dalai Lama also preaches the middle path of the Mahayana sect. Some in Hinayana sect consider middle path seekers as nihilists. Some in Mahayana consider their counter parts as absolutists.

Sonam writes –

Dog Dead
There is no such thing
As middle path
We al gravitate to our sides
If there is a path in the middle
I would be the first to find it
I am neither here nor there…
To her right
To your left
Far from their centre
There is a dog chewing a bone
In the middle of the path
A truck comes speeding
 
When W. H Auden said “Poetry is the clear expression of mixed feelings” maybe he meant the above. His Holiness Dalai Lama’s decision to not go to war, to leave Tibet with his people, to protect his people at all cost, to keep the peace, to wait with grave patience reminds me of a story of Sri Krishna that my brother and I loved as children. His Holiness Dalai Lama is criticised by some who stayed back in Tibet and some Tibetans who crave for armed battle against China.

Credit:Rukmini Sen

In the Mahabharata we learn that Jarasandha, the King of Madgadha, was livid when he heard that Krishna had killed Kamsa, his son-in-law. His daughters-Asti and Prapti had sent a message to him that they had now become widows.

Jarasandha decided to teach Krishna and the Yadavas a lesson. He attacked Mathura seventeen times. Before Krishna and Balarama could come up with a grand plan they heard Jarasandha had entered into an armed alliance with Damghosha of Chedi, Dantavakra of Karusa, Rukmi of Vidarbha and the brothers Vind and Anuvinda of Avanti. The alliance had only a single aim-destroy Mathura and the Yadava clan. The Kingdom of Hastinapur expressed helplessness in coming to the aid of the Yadavas.
 
Krishna was the only person who repeatedly cautioned his clansmen against the war. He then hit upon the idea of shifting the capital from Mathura to Dwarka. Krishna placed the suggestion before King Ugrasena his grandfather. Ugrasena and all other courtiers and even the commanders of the Yadava army were against flight. Balarama too, wanted to fight against Jarasandha.
 
Urgasena told Krishna that if he ran away from battle field, he would be known as a Ranchod or one who has run away from a battle field. Krishna retorted that he had no worry about any new name being given to him. “I already have many names and one more does not make any difference”, he said. “Moreover, I am willing to sacrifice my reputation for saving my people and their lives”, he said.
 
Interesting descriptions about Dwarka’s construction are found in Puranas. "Fearing attack from Jarasangh and Kaalayvan on Mathura, Shri Krishna and Yadavas left Mathura and arrived at the coast of Saurashtra. They decided to build their capital in the coastal region and invoke the Vishwakarma the deity of construction. However, Vishwakarma says that the task can be completed only if Samudradev, the Lord of the sea provided some land. Shri Krishna worshipped Samudradev, who was pleased and gave them land measuring 12 yojans and the Lord Vishwakarma build Dwarka, a "city in gold".
 
While Sri Krishna and his sermons in Gita are mentioned repeatedly whenever war/battles/fights are talked about we rarely talk about how after the Mahabharata War Krishna lived for 36 years at Dwarka. At the end, the Vrshnis, Bhojas and Satvatas destroyed themselves in a fratricidal feud at Prabhasa but Krishna did not interfere to save them.
 
Like Sri Krishna, Hazrat Mohammed is also remembered for battles and wars by his detractors and many of his followers. What we often forget is that Muhammad left Mecca, in 622 CE, after he was warned about a plot to assassinate him. The migration of the Prophet and his followers from Mecca to Medina is known as Hijra or Hegira. After leaving his home in Mecca, Muhammad hid for three days in the Cave of Thawr, located south of his home city. He then travelled north and arrived at Quba' near Medina on July 2, 622. He moved from Quba' to Medina, two weeks later.

According to the Islamic faith, the Prophet was commanded by Allah to leave Mecca for Medina. The plot to assassinate him was the result of his preaching of the revelations God bestowed upon him. He could not preach in public and he had several opponents and enemies in Mecca. Medina was the place where Muhammad started to attract more and more followers.

For the next ten years, the city remained Muhammad's base, from where they marched to Mecca and conquered it without battle. Mecca was won by a treaty not by a war. Today, Medina is considered the second holiest place in Islam and is often referred to as the "City of the Prophet," home of the "Prophet's Mosque". After the death of the Prophet Muhammad, Medina remained an important centre and was considered the de facto capital of the Caliphate.

Sitting here in Norbulinka, drinking the Tibetan butter tea I can’t help but ruminate over HH Dalai Lama’s simple lines – “Nothing is permanent, not even exile”
 
On the evening of 5^th of July, when Suresh and I sat down for our late lunch we read “Untitled” –
Hope is
A counterpoint to
Disappointment,
I wear it like
A belt whose holes
Widen each day
 
This is followed by the heart breaking lines-
 
When the sun admonishes
I cram my head into
The refrigerator
To reaffirm
My allegiance to
The cold mountains.

We were told by one of the men at the coffee shop that all Tibetans shops would be close on the 6^th of July. It was HH Dalai Lama’s 81^st Birthday. We decided to visit his temple that day and watch the students of Tibet School of Arts perform. After all, we live in interesting times. We want numerous answers about resistance, war and peace.

About time we groped for at least the right questions!

(The author, Rukmini Sen, has been an electronic media journalist for twenty years. She launched and produced shows like Special Correspondent and Seedhi Baat. For last three years she has been developing film projects for various film studios. She also edits Hillele. Org)

Credit:Rukmini Sen
 

The post Butter Chai Ruminations at Norbulinka appeared first on SabrangIndia.