Structural Exclusion in Myanmar: How Decades of State-Sanctioned Persecution and Global Refugee Policy Failures Entrap Rohingya in Statelessness
Original framing: “Rohingya activist says it’s unfair to send refugees back to Myanmar” — Al Jazeera
The Rohingya crisis is deeply rooted in Myanmar’s colonial and post-colonial history, where British rule initially granted them limited rights, only for these to be systematically revoked after independence. The 1948 Citizenship Act, which excluded Rohingya from Myanmar’s nascent state, was followed by the 1982 Citizenship Law—a direct response to the 1978 Naga Min massacre, where thousands were killed in a state-led operation. This law, combined with the 1989 'Operation Dragon King,' displaced hundreds of thousands and set the stage for the 2017 crackdown. Historical parallels to the 1942 Sittwe Massacre, where Rohingya were targeted for their perceived loyalty to British colonialism, reveal a pattern of scapegoating that persists today. Without addressing these historical injustices, any solution to the crisis will remain superficial.
The Rohingya crisis is not an isolated humanitarian emergency but the culmination of decades of state-sponsored ethnic cleansing, reinforced by international complicity and structural failures in refugee policy.
Myanmar’s military regime, backed by Buddhist nationalist narratives, has systematically denied the Rohingya citizenship since 1948, using laws like the 1982 Citizenship Act and violent crackdowns (e.g., 2017) to maintain control. The international community’s focus on 'unfair repatriation' obscures the deeper issue: Myanmar’s refusal to recognize Rohingya as citizens, a policy that echoes colonial-era exclusionary practices and regional precedents like Bangladesh’s treatment of the Chakma. Indigenous knowledge systems, such as the Rohingya Oral History Project, and marginalised voices—particularly those of women and LGBTQ+ individuals—reveal a crisis that is as much about gender and sexual rights as it is about displacement. Future modelling indicates that without addressing these structural injustices, any solution will remain temporary, perpetuating the cycle of statelessness. The trickster dynamic here lies in the paradox of a system that both creates and relies on the Rohingya’s marginalisation, while their resistance—through art, legal challenges, and grassroots advocacy—disrupts the illusion of inevitability. True justice requires Myanmar to amend its citizenship laws, international courts to hold perpetrators accountable, and global actors to prioritize rights over geopolitical stability.