Weaponizing Refugees: How Bangladesh-Based Islamist Militancy Has Shaped Conflict in Arakan for Over Seven Decades
Since the end of British colonial rule in South Asia, Islamist and identity-based militant movements have repeatedly turned civilian displacement into a strategic tool. Nowhere has this pattern appeared as persistently as in Arakan, where Bangladesh-based Muslim insurgent groups have, for more than seventy years, leveraged refugee crises to gain international attention, political sympathy, and diplomatic pressure against Myanmar.
From the Mujahid rebellion that erupted shortly after Myanmar’s independence in 1948 to more recent militant formations operating under changing names and structures, the conflict in Arakan reveals a consistent strategy: embedding armed movements within refugee populations and framing displacement as both a humanitarian emergency and a political weapon.
Analysts note that this approach mirrors tactics seen in other global conflict zones, including Palestine, Afghanistan, and Syria, where militant groups have sought to transform refugee suffering into international leverage, funding streams, and moral legitimacy.
The roots of Muslim militancy in Arakan can be traced to the Mujahid insurgency (1947–1961), which sought autonomy or integration with East Pakistan. Although the rebellion was eventually suppressed, it established a template for future movements—operating from across the border, relying on porous frontiers, and cultivating external support networks.
Over subsequent decades, these insurgencies re-emerged under new banners, including the Rohingya Patriotic Front (RPF), Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO), Arakan Rohingya Islamic Front (ARIF), and later the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA). In recent years, newer entities such as RIM, ARA, and the so-called “4 Brothers Rohingya Alliance” have surfaced, continuing the cycle of rebranding and reorganization.
Security observers argue that while leadership structures and rhetoric have changed, the operational base has remained largely consistent—Bangladesh’s border regions, where militant groups have benefited from lax enforcement, political sensitivities, and connections to transnational Islamist networks.
Central to this long-running strategy has been the repeated use of refugee flows as political capital. Large-scale displacement, whether triggered by clashes, counterinsurgency operations, or communal violence, has been used to mobilize international opinion and engage global institutions such as the United Nations and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
Critics contend that this pattern blurs the line between genuine humanitarian crises and deliberate political manipulation, placing civilian populations at continued risk while prolonging instability in Arakan. As the conflict enters its eighth decade, the legacy of weaponized displacement remains one of the most enduring—and controversial—features of the Arakan question.
Comments
Post a Comment