Towards Repatriation: The Issue of the Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar
Author
Schmidt, Ida
Term
4. term
Publication year
2020
Abstract
Denne afhandling undersøger, hvorfor repatrieringen af Rohingya-muslimerne fra Bangladesh til Myanmar endnu ikke er lykkedes, trods gentagne forsøg siden voldsbølgen i 2017. Med udgangspunkt i fire teoretiske perspektiver – retten til at have rettigheder, islamofobi, politisk legitimitet og politiske mulighedsstrukturer – belyser studiet, hvordan statsborgerskab og tilhørsforhold, sociale fordomme, samt statens incitamenter og institutionelle rammer tilsammen former repatrieringsudsigterne. Metodisk anvendes et komparativt design og indholdsanalytisk tilgang, hvor Rohingya-sagen sammenholdes med Krimtatarernes repatriering i 1990’erne for at identificere forskelle og ligheder i muligheder for tilbagevenden. Analysen peger på tre hovedhindringer: 1) manglende statsborgerskab og rettigheder, som får Rohingyaerne til at afvise tilbagevenden uden garanti for beskyttelse; 2) racisme, islamofobi og lokal modvilje, der gør tilbagevenden usikker og uigennemførlig; og 3) regeringsmæssige udfordringer, hvor nationale og internationale hensyn og legitimitetskrav begrænser handlemulighederne. Sammenligningen med Krimtatarerne viser flere gunstige politiske muligheder og udsigt til statsborgerskab dér, mens islamofobi og legitimitetsspørgsmål fyldte mindre – hvilket kan forklare forskellen i udfald. Resultaterne indikerer, at fremskridt forudsætter ændringer i rettigheds- og statsborgerskabsordninger, sociale relationer og politiske incitamenter.
This thesis investigates why the repatriation of Rohingya Muslims from Bangladesh to Myanmar has not succeeded, despite multiple attempts since the 2017 violence. Guided by four theoretical lenses—the right to have rights, islamophobia, political legitimacy, and political opportunity structures—the study examines how questions of citizenship and belonging, social prejudice, and state incentives and institutions jointly shape prospects for return. Methodologically, it employs a comparative research design and content analysis, juxtaposing the Rohingya case with the Crimean Tatars’ repatriation in the 1990s to identify similarities and differences in pathways to return. The analysis highlights three main obstacles: (1) the absence of citizenship and rights, prompting Rohingya to reject return without credible guarantees; (2) racism, islamophobia, and local hostility, which render return unsafe and impracticable; and (3) governmental constraints, where domestic and international considerations and legitimacy needs limit action. The comparison indicates that the Crimean Tatars benefited from greater political opportunities and a clearer route to citizenship, while islamophobia and legitimacy concerns were less prominent—helping explain divergent outcomes. The findings suggest that progress requires changes across rights and citizenship frameworks, social relations, and political incentives.
[This summary has been generated with the help of AI directly from the project (PDF)]
Documents