Reading Between the Lines of Various Statements on Northern Arakan

GAN/ Arakan (Rakhine State) May 26, 2024

US's statement on northern Arakan situations (Photocredit)

On May 17, 2024, the Arakan Army captured a Muslim-majority northern township of Buthidaung and the incident drew more attention from the regional and international observers. Different actors including the United League of Arakan (ULA), the political wing of the AA, also later released a statement explaining the unfolding situations on the ground.

Other statements released by organisations like the United Nations (UN), foreign embassies, international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) and activist groups interpreted the situations differently. To start with the UN, the release of the UNCHR on May 24, 2024, titled “Myanmar: Growing human rights crisis in Rakhine state” was published. However, the contents of the publication were full of alleged accusations. For instance, the piece has mentioned,

“Survivors recounted that the Arakan Army had abused them and extorted money from them as they made their way to Rohingya villages around 10 to 15 kilometres south of the town, where Rohingya already displaced by earlier attacks on villages had previously sought shelter.”

It is also quite surprising to note that the UN statement mentioned these kinds of unfounded claims over a resistance group fighting for the protection of the local population.  A more pessimist presentation on the context can be early found on May 18, 2024, in a statement by the ASEAN Parliamentarian For Human Rights. The chairperson of the publication claimed,

“We are extremely alarmed and concerned by reports that the Arakan Army is indiscriminately attacking Rohingya civilians in northern Rakhine State, and it is imperative that the international community act quickly in order to prevent further catastrophic loss of life and potential genocide.”

The tones expressed by the activist organizations are even more aggressive and offensive toward the ground situations and these are rather unhelpful for the sustainable resolutions of the crisis.

But, observers can see a different colour from more pragmatic and political entities like the United States (US), European Union (EU) and other countries. Indeed, the US’s statement even did not mention the name of the AA in its statement. A further moderate approach by the EU and its cooperating countries can be observed in a joint statement on May 24, 2024. It said,

“The situation is increasingly dangerous for all civilians, including Rakhine, Rohingya and other ethnic communities. All parties must ensure that they are prioritising the protection of civilians. There must be accountability for all atrocities committed in Myanmar.”

More importantly, this joint statement presents a mild stance on the ground situation not just in Arakan but also in nationwide Myanmar.

However, the expression by more Islamic groups such as the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC) and Turkey can be observed. OIC, for instance, on May 20, 2024, took a more radical stance. One of its sentences read,

“The General Secretariat of the OIC expresses deep concern and alarm over recent reports of violence, forced displacement, and property destruction against the Rohingya Muslim community in Buthidaung Township in Myanmar’s Rakhine State.”

The statement by Turkey’s embassy also followed a similar path. There are also releases by various groups or coalitions like the Muslim diaspora, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and domestic and foreign NGOs.

In short, a clear distinction could be found between the statements released by governmental institutions, (more moderate) and the (more normative) UN, NGOs activist groups and (more radical) Islam religion-based organizations.  

At the same time, it is critical note that the sustainable resolution of the Muslim issue in Arakan needs better understanding on the ground situations and constructive approaches toward the complex problems.