Thesis Format
Monograph
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Program
Anthropology
Supervisor
Randa Farah
Abstract
The central argument of this dissertation is that the Rohingya refugees are trapped in a liminal state in Bangladesh, where the government persists in its repatriation-only policy despite Rohingyas’ fear of persecution that might await them in Myanmar. This prolonged displacement hinders their ability to imagine a future. Based on nine-months-long fieldwork, ethnographic material, and drawing on a large body of literature, including the anthropology of the state (Agamben, 1998; Ong, 2003; Sharma & Gupta, 2009; Turner, 2016), humanitarianism (Fassin, 2007a, 2007b, 2012; Lewis, 2019), refugee studies and displacement (Arendt, 1994; Farah, 2009, 2023; Gell, 1992; Hirsch, 1997; Lefebvre, 1991; Martin, 2015), and anthropology of the future (Massey, 2023; Ramsay, 2020; Bryant & Knight, 2019), this project questions the power of the state and humanitarian organizations, examining bureaucratic policies and regulations as refracting their power implemented through policies and programs that reproduce statelessness. I first argue that the Bangladeshi government’s repatriation policy is executed through bureaucratic measures, wherein the re-orientation of Rohingyas toward Myanmar’s culture is used to reinforce its policy that precludes other solutions. This policy has led to prolonged displacement and the warehousing of the refugees in camps, where Rohingyas navigate bureaucratic obstacles daily and attempt to make sense of their present, but with no real prospects for the future. Second, I argue that humanitarianism is highly politicized and not devoid of contradictions, inequalities, or structural limitations. Humanitarianism functions as a shadow state, with humanitarian agencies often acting as extensions of government policies where performance is emphasized over humanitarian assistance. A third focus is on the Bangladeshi host and Rohingya refugee relationships, and here I argue that tensions refract a nationalist agenda and governance. The relationships are also shaped by socioeconomic status and, to some extent, by the proximity or distance of residents from the camps. I conclude by arguing that although Arakan remains an anchor of Rohingya identity, prolonged statelessness and liminality have gradually turned it into an imagined place, unreachable for most. Unable to exercise their rights to alternative durable solutions, namely, integration or resettlement, the Rohingya future has been placed ‘on hold.’
Summary for Lay Audience
Rohingyas have been subjected to persecution and denationalization through citizenship denial in Myanmar, leading to their statelessness and human rights violations. They now live in refugee camps in Bangladesh, and repatriation to Myanmar is a widely discussed solution. During the displacement, Rohingyas have been in constant interactions with actors such as states, humanitarian organizations, activists, and laypeople. My research examines the interactions, policies, and relationships among these actors that unfold in refugee camps in Bangladesh and reshape the Rohingya refugee experiences. To investigate the contemporary sites of Rohingya experiences, struggles and suffering, I anchor the study on key concepts, mainly: ‘camps,’ ‘repatriation,’ and ‘future.’
I question the value of the Bangladeshi state’s policy of advocating for repatriation as the only solution for the Rohingya refugees, which is the foundation of the dissertation. The main problem with the ‘repatriation-as-only-solution’ approach is that it disregards how it informs bureaucracy, humanitarianism, and refugee reception and, in turn, how these reshape Rohingya refugee lives. Ultimately, these policies and solutions for the Rohingya refugee issue disregard the lives of Rohingyas and their own perceptions and plans regarding their future. In fact, one of my main conclusions is that state policies and humanitarian practices suspend Rohingya futures by restricting alternative solutions to their status and by confining them to refugee camps.
Based on fieldwork, I present four arguments: First, I argue that Bangladesh’s repatriation policy makes Rohingyas the subject of state regulations, and Rohingyas navigate bureaucratic obstacles to make sense of their present time. Second, humanitarianism becomes an extension of the state, and it is highly politicized and, therefore, not devoid of contradictions, inequalities, or structural limitations. Third, I argue that the ‘host’ (local Bangladeshi) - ‘guest’ (Rohingyas) relationship needs economic class-based and spatial proximity-based discussion which goes beyond the conflict-tension dynamics because anti-Rohingya sentiment is a by-product of sovereign and humanitarian governance. The final argument is that prolonged statelessness has gradually turned the ‘homeland’ into an imagined place for many Rohingyas. Therefore, repatriation does not conclusively mean a solution, and it is time to bring integration and resettlement to the third country to the discussion.
Recommended Citation
Afrin, Ibtesum, "Prolonged Displacement and the Suspended Future of the Rohingya Refugees in Bangladesh" (2025). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 10712.
https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/10712
Included in
Asian Studies Commons, Ethnic Studies Commons, Human Geography Commons, International Relations Commons, Migration Studies Commons, Nonprofit Studies Commons, Oral History Commons, Other International and Area Studies Commons, Politics and Social Change Commons, Race and Ethnicity Commons, Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons, South and Southeast Asian Languages and Societies Commons, Women's Studies Commons
