Lack of clarity on humanitarian corridor could trap Bangladesh, warns former ambassador Munshi Faiz

Former ambassador Munshi Faiz Ahmad has issued a stark warning about recent calls from Bangladeshi officials to establish a “humanitarian corridor” into Myanmar’s Rakhine state.

Speaking on bdnews24.com’s discussion programme “Inside Out”, he expressed deep concern over the proposed initiative, which aims to facilitate United Nations humanitarian aid during Myanmar’s protracted conflict.

While acknowledging the good intentions behind the effort, Faiz emphasised that Bangladesh must tread carefully and demand complete clarity before proceeding.

“The strength of our friendship with China lies in mutual respect and non-interference,” the former chairman of government think tank Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies (BIISS) noted, drawing a parallel to broader diplomatic principles.

Faiz warned that without clear answers about the corridor’s management, Bangladesh risks falling into a trap.

“We must retain absolute control over any such corridor. Without it, we should categorically reject the idea,” he said. “Otherwise, we risk walking into a noose that could bind us in ways we cannot afford.”

His comments come amid renewed discussions on the Rohingya repatriation process and the evolving security situation in Myanmar.

Myanmar’s recent announcement that 180,000 Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh are eligible for repatriation has reignited hopes, though progress remains elusive.

ROHINGYA REPATRIATION: PROGRESS STILL UNCLEAR

On Apr 4, Myanmar’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Than Shwe met Khalilur Rahman, the chief advisor’s high representative for Rohingya and priority affairs, at the BIMSTEC summit in Bangkok.

During the meeting, Than Shwe said Myanmar had identified 180,000 Rohingya refugees as eligible for repatriation following an initial assessment of 800,000 refugees in Bangladesh.

Myanmar is also working to finalise screening for an additional 70,000 Rohingya and pledged to accelerate screening for the remaining 550,000.

Despite these assurances, Faiz remained sceptical about tangible progress. “Has there been significant progress? I don’t think so,” he said.

Drawing from insights shared by Khalilur and Myanmar’s deputy prime minister—now also serving as the junta’s national security advisor—Faiz noted: “Everyone is frustrated. The junta itself lacks control over key areas. While the announcement sounds positive, there’s little cause for optimism given the current realities.”

“WE NEED FULL TRANSPARENCY ON THE CORRIDOR”

Myanmar is currently embroiled in a devastating civil war between the military junta and rebel forces, a conflict that has raged since 2021.

In December last year, the Arakan Army took control of the entire Rakhine state, which borders Bangladesh. The military junta retains a foothold only at Kyaukpyu seaport in the region.

In the midst of this escalating crisis, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) released a report titled "Rakhine: A Famine in the Making" in November, highlighting the dire humanitarian situation.

Following UN Secretary-General António Guterres’s visit to Dhaka in April, Khalilur unveiled preliminary details about the humanitarian corridor. Since then, officials have repeatedly stressed Bangladesh’s commitment to humanitarian assistance.

Faiz said, “The proposal for a corridor has been put forth. If such a corridor comes to fruition, we could facilitate the safe return of the Rohingya, a notion many have contemplated. I believe this could be a viable option. If this initiative can be realised, it deserves serious consideration.”

“If properly managed, it could facilitate Rohingya repatriation—a possibility many have explored. It deserves serious consideration if viable.”

However, he underscored that several critical questions surrounding the corridor remain unanswered.

Yet critical questions remain unanswered. “Who will operate this corridor? Who holds the control? What will be permitted to traverse it? While there are claims of a humanitarian corridor, we must ask: who will ensure its efficacy and safety?” Faiz asked.

“While it’s called a humanitarian corridor, who guarantees its safety and effectiveness? Transparency is non-negotiable. We must be informed of every detail.”

He stressed that Bangladesh must hold full authority: “We must control when aid begins, who participates, and retain the right to suspend operations at any time. If we cannot guarantee this control, we should not proceed.”

Faiz warned that advancing without these safeguards would impose “a dangerous burden” on Bangladesh. “Caution is paramount,” he reiterated.

MIXED MESSAGES FROM GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS

Faiz also criticised contradictory statements from different arms of the government.

“Some officials deny any talks took place. Others claim an agreement exists under certain conditions. Still others say discussions are merely preliminary. These mixed messages have muddied the waters.”

He urged restraint: “Given the current circumstances, I believe we should hold off on pursuing this initiative.”

The full interview aired Friday on bdnews24.com’s Facebook and YouTube channels, covering a range of topics from Bangladesh’s foreign policy to regional conflicts and diplomatic relations with India, Pakistan, and China.

‘LACK OF CONSULTATION LEADS TO SUSPICION’

Several political parties, including the BNP, have voiced strong opposition to the proposed corridor.

When asked for his views, Faiz said: “The main reason for their objection is that this is a major decision. Yes, it concerns the sovereignty of Bangladesh.

“So how can such a decision be made without consulting everyone? After all, the interim government is a provisional one, even though it came to power through a mass uprising.”

He believes the parties’ objections are justified — that the government is assuming responsibilities it was never meant to shoulder.

“What’s happened is that an opportunity for misunderstanding has been created, and people are indeed misunderstanding it. That’s why everyone is saying: this is such an important matter — how can you make this decision without consulting us?

“Political parties have, at different times, won elections and formed governments in various ways. They absolutely have a right. And those in power now haven’t secured their legitimacy in the same way. So I believe the objections raised by the parties are valid.”

Advising that all parties be brought into the discussions, the former ambassador said: “Everyone should be included here. Everyone should be taken into confidence about what is happening or not happening. There should be greater openness about this issue — not only with political parties but also with the general public. Transparency is needed.”

Emphasising that consultation is essential no matter what, he added: “Political leaders should be part of the discussions. The government may not always follow their advice, but without consultation, there is every reason to be suspicious.”

KEEPING CONTACT WITH ARAKAN ARMY ’LOGICAL’

When it comes to Rohingya repatriation, it’s crucial to acknowledge that control of Rakhine is currently held by the Arakan Army, not the junta government.

Against this backdrop, Bangladesh has begun discussions with the Arakan Army, raising the question: how reasonable is this approach?

Faiz argues that it is “entirely logical”.

What could the future of Rakhine look like? He laid out several compelling scenarios: “One possibility is that the Arakan Army completely liberates Rakhine. Although they haven’t formally declared independence yet, many speculate they may choose to in the future.

“In that situation, a new nation could emerge, effectively sidelining the junta’s authority. If that happens, who else would it make sense to engage with other than the Arakan Army?

“Initiating dialogue now is crucial; waiting until later could make it extremely difficult to establish communication. That’s why it’s entirely reasonable to start engaging with them early.”

Faiz continued: “In another scenario, the Arakan Army could gain control but opt for autonomy rather than full independence. In that case, the junta might still retain some influence. While we’re currently in contact with the junta, it’s equally important to establish ties with the Arakan Army. If they choose autonomy, they will govern the region and set the rules.”

He stressed that maintaining contact is essential for the success of Rohingya repatriation.

“If the Rohingya return to Rakhine, they will have to live alongside the Rakhine people. Therefore, establishing relationships with the Rakhines or their representatives — whether military or political — is absolutely necessary.

“There is deep mistrust between the Rohingyas and the Rakhines. Building communication isn’t just helpful; it’s imperative. If dialogue can reduce this distrust, repatriation might succeed. Without it, repatriation is doomed to fail.

“Consider a scenario where the junta defeats the Arakan Army and regains control of the region. Even then, they might struggle to govern effectively. A central government may remain, but local administration could still be heavily influenced by the Rakhine population.

“If the Rohingya return, they will inevitably have to live among the Rakhine people. In that situation, the junta won’t be able to guarantee their safety. That’s why building and nurturing positive relationships with both the Rakhine people and the Arakan Army is absolutely critical if we are truly committed to Rohingya repatriation.”

‘NEITHER CHINA NOR INDIA IS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE OTHER’

In terms of diplomatic relations, no country should be considered as “replaceable” by another, said the former diplomat.

After a slight cooling in its relations with India, Bangladesh has been trying to strengthen its ties with China. The country has announced plans to build three hospitals in Bangladesh and has also offered medical visas.

In this context, when asked how beneficial Bangladesh’s friendship with China could be, Faiz said: "China cannot replace India, nor can India replace China. On 4th October 1975, China officially recognised Bangladesh. But the relationship between the two countries goes beyond that formal recognition; it has a long history.

"Since recognising Bangladesh, China has been a strong and supportive partner in many ways. From arms to military cooperation, China has helped us in numerous areas," he added.

He recalled that China had at times written off loans and gradually emerged as Bangladesh’s largest trading partner since 2013, overtaking India.

It also ranks among the top foreign investors in the country.

Faiz highlighted that China's approach has been marked by mutual respect and non-interference, distinguishing it from some other development partners.

While offering substantial support, China has refrained from meddling in Bangladesh’s internal affairs, which he described as a key strength of the relationship.

“When China cooperates with any country, they naturally aim to protect their own interests. But they also act in the interest of their partners. That is the most distinctive quality of China’s friendship,” he said.

Referring to India, he said the neighbouring country has often attempted to influence Bangladesh’s internal policymaking, despite enjoying mutual benefits from the relationship. “We have observed this time and again.”

In contrast, Faiz praised China’s approach as more respectful and rooted in mutual interests.

“So, however we put it, friendship with China is good. But that does not mean we can replace the need for friendship with others by relying solely on China.”

'TEESTA PROJECT MUST BE CARRIED OUT WITH CONSENT'

When asked about China's involvement in the Teesta project, he said: "The previous government also wanted to involve China in the Teesta project. When the initiative was taken, India sent a high-level delegation to try to stop us, claiming they would take care of it.

“But the real issue is, if India doesn't act, if India doesn't provide us with Teesta River water, are we supposed to sit idly by for years, decades? No, our people are suffering; something needs to be done for them."

The former diplomat believes that if India does not provide upstream water, there is no point in waiting.

He said: "In this region, if water doesn't come from upstream, we need to take action based on what we can do. We already have a project in place, and the Chinese have reviewed it and are willing to help.

“So, we can certainly tell them. But we must be cautious not to do anything that directly harms India."

When asked about India's objections, Faiz said: "Just because they raise objections, does that mean we always have to listen? If they allow us to proceed, we wouldn't need to turn to China.

“If they release the water and assist us with what we want to do here, we wouldn't face this situation. But since they are not helping, we are left with no choice but to approach China.

“So, we will proceed, but we must do so transparently. We won’t act secretly; we will explain why we are doing it."

Faiz also emphasised the need for preparations in case India releases water during floods.

“We must stay prepared that India might release water one day. Whatever we do in our project, we should make room for adjusting to that scenario,” he said.

Explaining the rationale, he said: “Right now there’s no water, so we’re planning accordingly. We’re trying to channel rainwater, floodwater, and groundwater in different ways. But one day India may release water, and we must be ready to absorb that into our system.

“This consideration must be included from the start.”

“I don’t see any fault in proceeding with China, as long as we don’t knowingly and openly try to harm India,” he added.

[Writing in English by Syed Mahmud Onindo and Sheikh Fariha Bristy]