The Financial Incentives Behind the Rohingya Crisis: A Critical Analysis
Introduction?
The Rohingya crisis has attracted substantial international humanitarian aid, with major NGOs and CSOs receiving millions of dollars annually to provide critical support to refugees. However, this flow of funds creates a paradox where the resolution of the Rohingya issue, particularly their repatriation and reintegration into Myanmar, could significantly reduce the financial support these organizations receive. This article examines the potential financial impacts on these organizations if the Rohingya are successfully repatriated and integrated back into Myanmar, as well as the statements and commitments made by the National Unity Government (NUG) and other groups regarding Rohingya inclusion. Additionally, it explores how these organizations might mislead the Rohingya to maintain funding.?
??
Financial Impact on NGOs and CSOs?
The 2023 Joint Response Plan (JRP) for the Rohingya crisis requested $876 million to support approximately 1.47 million people, including Rohingya refugees and host communities. For 2024, the JRP requested $852.4 million to support 1.35 million people. These funds are distributed among numerous organizations, including UN agencies, international NGOs, and local CSOs.?
??
Key Organizations and Their Funding:?
- UNICEF: Engaged in child protection, education, and health services. Executive Director's salary: $580,848. UNICEF received approximately $119.5 million for the Rohingya crisis in 2023, with a funding gap of $54 million. More details can be found (https://www.unicef.org/media/151381/file/Bangladesh-Humanitarian-SitRep-(End-Year),-1-January-to-31-December-2023.pdf). ?
- World Vision: Provides essential services, including food, shelter, and education to Rohingya refugees. CEO's salary: $670,000. Information about World Vision's involvement is available (https://australianbusinessjournal.com/world-vision-ceo-salary-and-benefits-package/). ?
- Save the Children: Focuses on health, education, and protection services for Rohingya children. CEO's salary: $482,165. Learn more (https://australianbusinessjournal.com/world-vision-ceo-salary-and-benefits-package/). ?
- WFP (World Food Programme): Provides food assistance, which includes increasing the food ration from $8 to $10 per person per month. WFP faced significant funding shortfalls in 2023, leading to cuts in food voucher values from $12 to $8 per person per month. Details can be found (https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/07/1138717). ?
- IOM (International Organization for Migration): Offers comprehensive humanitarian support, including health services and protection against gender-based violence. IOM called for $119 million for its operations in 2024. Read more (https://www.iom.int/rohingya-response). ?
- UNHCR: Distributes LPG cylinders and provides essential services to refugees. UNHCR was part of the funding appeal and has faced ongoing funding challenges, impacting its ability to meet the needs of the Rohingya refugees. More information is available (https://bangladesh.un.org/en/218385-un-agencies-implement-rohingya-refugee-response-activities-following-allocation-cerf-funding). ?
- UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund): Focuses on sexual and reproductive health services and gender-based violence prevention and response. UNFPA received $250,000 for its Rohingya-related interventions in 2023. Details are (https://bangladesh.un.org/en/218385-un-agencies-implement-rohingya-refugee-response-activities-following-allocation-cerf-funding).?
??
The successful repatriation and reintegration of the Rohingya could potentially reduce the need for such extensive humanitarian support, thereby decreasing the funding these organizations receive. For example, if the entire $852.4 million requested for 2024 were no longer necessary, this would represent a significant financial loss for the organizations involved.?
??
Statements by NUG and Other Groups?
The NUG and other revolutionary groups have made several commitments to Rohingya inclusion and repatriation:?
??
1. National Unity Government (NUG): The NUG has expressed a commitment to repealing discriminatory laws such as the 1982 Citizenship Law, which has been a central issue in the Rohingya's statelessness. They aim to establish a new citizenship law based on birthright, which would grant the Rohingya full citizenship rights. The NUG also emphasizes the importance of voluntary, safe, and dignified repatriation of Rohingya refugees. More details are available (https://thediplomat.com/2023/06/why-the-national-unity-governments-statement-on-myanmars-rohingya-is-important/), and (https://www.irrawaddy.com/news/burma/nug-calls-for-justice-for-rohingya-persecuted-by-myanmar-military.html).?
??
2. Arakan Army (AA): The AA has stated that the repatriation of the Rohingya needs to be discussed with them and that a roadmap for repatriation should be developed based on mutual consent. This indicates a willingness to work towards Rohingya reintegration within the political framework of Rakhine State. Read more (https://www.eurasiareview.com/19092023-arakan-rohingya-national-alliance-initiative-by-rohingya-diaspora-in-the-international-arena-analysis/). ?
??
3. ARNA (Arakan Rohingya National Alliance): ARNA advocates for the inclusion of the Rohingya in political processes and the development of a roadmap for their repatriation in collaboration with the NUG and AA. Details are (https://www.eurasiareview.com/19092023-arakan-rohingya-national-alliance-initiative-by-rohingya-diaspora-in-the-international-arena-analysis/). ?
??
Potential Misleading Practices by Organizations?
Given the substantial financial stakes, there is a concern that some organizations may have an incentive to maintain the status quo rather than fully supporting the repatriation of the Rohingya. Here are potential ways these organizations might mislead the Rohingya or the international community:?
??
1. Exaggerating Needs and Conditions: Organizations might emphasize the dire conditions in the camps and the immense needs of the Rohingya to secure continued funding, potentially overstating the challenges or underreporting improvements. Read more (https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/07/1138717). ?
?
2. Selective Information: By selectively highlighting specific issues while downplaying others, organizations might present a skewed picture that supports the need for ongoing aid rather than sustainable solutions like repatriation.?
?
?3. Promoting Dependency: Encouraging a narrative that the Rohingya are wholly dependent on external aid can justify continued funding but might undermine efforts to build self-sufficiency and long-term solutions. More information is (https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/07/1138717), and (https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/06/1148717). ?
??
4. Undermining Repatriation Efforts: Some organizations might indirectly undermine repatriation efforts by emphasizing the risks and challenges of returning to Myanmar without equally highlighting the commitments and improvements made by the NUG and other groups. Details can be found (https://www.eurasiareview.com/19092023-arakan-rohingya-national-alliance-initiative-by-rohingya-diaspora-in-the-international-arena-analysis/), (https://thediplomat.com/2023/06/why-the-national-unity-governments-statement-on-myanmars-rohingya-is-important/), and (https://www.irrawaddy.com/news/burma/nug-calls-for-justice-for-rohingya-persecuted-by-myanmar-military.html). ?
??
Conclusion?
The humanitarian aid provided to the Rohingya is crucial for their survival and well-being. However, the potential financial losses that NGOs and CSOs might face if the Rohingya are successfully repatriated highlight a complex dynamic where financial incentives could inadvertently oppose the resolution of the crisis. A genuine commitment to resolving the Rohingya issue must consider these financial dynamics and strive for a balance where the ultimate goal is the safe, dignified, and voluntary repatriation and integration of the Rohingya into Myanmar, regardless of the financial implications for humanitarian organizations.?
References?
??