It’s still largely unclear why Bangladesh abstained from voting in the United Nations General Assembly on June 18 on the “situation in Myanmar”. On the day, the UNGA passed a resolution on the above issue with a vote of 119-1 where only Belarus was against it, and 36 countries including Bangladesh abstained from voting.
The resolution was initiated by some UN members including the US, EU, UK, and Canada among others. In fact, it was a rare step of UNGA calling on member states to “prevent the flow of arms” into Myanmar and condemning military coup in the violence-wracked country. The resolution also focused on emergency declaration, detention of its political leaders and calling for restoration of democracy in Myanmar.
Â
The clarification of Bangladesh Ministry of Foreign Affairs about abstention from voting raised eyebrows of concerned circles when it said ‘the resolution failed to adequately reflect on the Rohingya crisis and in recommending any actions to resolve that crisis’. Bangladesh Ambassador to UN Rabab Fatima said the resolution fell short of expectations and would be sending a wrong message. The failure of international community in addressing the crisis creates a sense of impunity in Myanmar, she said.
Condemning the killing of protesting people, brutality by the army with weapons bought with people’s money was the right thing to do as a principle. Bangladesh has shown its weakness on Rohingya issue for Myanmar army’s inhuman treatment.
If savage killing in Myanmar is to be tolerated then forcible exodus of Muslims from Rohingya to Bangladesh is also to be tolerated. Bangladesh is too much dependent on India and the international community gives no importance to Bangladesh for not having its own independent position.
India also refrained from voting. Did Bangladesh Follow the same strategy? Indian Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador TS Tirumurti, said that India has “direct stakes in the maintenance of peace and stability in Myanmar.” As the only country to share a border with both Bangladesh and Myanmar, he said that India has the “highest stakes in resolving this issue at the earliest”. But New Delhi has not yet recognized the National Unity Government (NUG) of Myanmar which has started fighting against the junta. The deposed civilian lawmakers have recently formed a parallel civilian government called NUG.
India called for the process of “safe, speedy and sustainable repatriation” of the Rohingya refugees from Bangladesh to Rakhine State to be “expedited”. It was to some extent different from the phrasing used in the UNGA resolution – “voluntary, safe, dignified and sustainable repatriation” though NUG has formally stated the repatriation if it is done “voluntarily, safely and with dignity”.
China also abstained from voting in UNGA against the Myanmar junta but its reason is something different. Beijing enjoys considerable influence over Naypyitaw. It believes that the Western approach of sanctions and condemnation may be counterproductive.
But Bangladesh is neither China nor India. Dhaka’s interest is different, so its foreign policy should be based on our national interest. Dhaka must remember that times have changed. The ongoing protests in Myanmar have been initiated by the young, educated generation against the military junta which is incomparable in the country’s history. These young people are more conscious about the democratic practice in outer world than their predecessors.
Myanmar army is isolated as international pariah. The people of Bangladesh want the opposition militias should be armed to confront gun with gun power. It is no threat for Myanmar army that countries should not sell weapons.
