Muslim Solidarity and the Lack of Effective Protection for Rohingya Refugees in Southeast Asia

Antje Missbach,Gunnar Stange

doi:10.3390/socsci10050166

Antje Missbach, Gunnar Stange

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10050166

Copy DOI

Journal: Social Sciences	Publication Date: May 8, 2021
Citations: 4	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Bielefeld University, University of Vienna

Abstract

Southeast Asia has the weakest normative frameworks for refugee protection of any region in the world apart from the Middle East. Only two out of ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have signed the 1951 International Refugee Convention. Nevertheless, the 2012 ASEAN Human Rights Declaration explicitly mentions the right to seek and receive asylum ‘in accordance with the laws of such State and applicable international agreements’ (ASEAN 2012). One of the litmus tests for this right has been the regional treatment of the Rohingya, a Muslim minority from Myanmar that faces forced displacement, discrimination, and large-scale state violence. Based on media content analysis and a scientific literature review, this paper sheds light on how ASEAN’s most prominent Muslim member countries, Indonesia and Malaysia, advocate on behalf of the forcibly displaced Rohingya. In particular, this paper focuses on competing forms of political interventions and shifting notions of Muslim solidarity. While Indonesia and Malaysia have been very vocal in bilateral, regional, and international forums to criticise the Myanmar government for their violation of basic human rights, both countries remain highly reluctant to offer sanctuary to Rohingya refugees, of which several thousand have attempted to reach Indonesia and Malaysia. This research finds that the notion of Muslim solidarity remains a symbolic rhetoric primarily directed at domestic audiences and the failure to render effective protection to refugees has rather increased over the last five years.

Highlights

Despite the close political and economic cooperation between member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the region still lacks a common and comprehensive approach to dealing with and responding to cross-border forced displacements
This paper addresses the question of why Malaysia and Indonesia were the only countries in the region to take on humanitarian responsibilities actively for Rohingya refugees, and why the shifting rationales have resulted in very different outcomes of their ostensible Muslim solidarity
Beyond its political and security implications, the Rohingya issue has dealt a reputational blow to the credibility of the ASEAN Community launched in 2015

Summary

Introduction

Despite the close political and economic cooperation between member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the region still lacks a common and comprehensive approach to dealing with and responding to cross-border forced displacements. Despite the lacking regional commitment for refugee protection, the member states of ASEAN host considerable numbers of refugees and asylum seekers in their respective territories. The humanitarian crisis that unfolded in May 2015, when Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia at first refused to allow Rohingya refugees stranded at sea to disembark in their respective territories, became a major test of regional cooperation (Gleeson 2017; Moretti 2020). This paper addresses the question of why Malaysia and Indonesia were the only countries in the region to take on humanitarian responsibilities actively for Rohingya refugees, and why the shifting rationales have resulted in very different outcomes of their ostensible Muslim solidarity. We end this paper with a short summary of the key findings

Method

A Crisis Unfolding

Conceptual Framework

Malaysia’s Ever-Shifting Responses

Indonesia’s Controversial Responses

Conclusions