Introduction
“We cannot lay low. We have a duty to the
people of Burma. We have to get information on abuses out
and be more vocal.” – International aid worker in Burma The situation in Burma* presents acute humanitarian challenges. While the country has been in the throes of a political and human rights crisis for decades, with terrible consequences for civilians, the Burmese government has prevented humanitarian organizations from assessing and responding to their needs. The lack of access not only blocks an effective response, but limits information on the plight of the Burmese people from reaching the outside world. This is especially the case for the large internally displaced population in the country belonging primarily to ethnic minority groups. Burma’s most protracted armed conflict has been between the Burman controlled state and ethnic non-Burman nationalities which constitute approximately 35 percent of the nation’s population of 52 million.1 Although many ethnic groups originally fought for independence, today almost all have accepted the union of Burma as a fact and merely seek increased local authority and equality within a new federal structure. The regime, presently known as the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC),2 still suspects them of scheming to split the country and sees this as justification for it repressive, often brutal policies against minorities.3 Violations carried out by the SPDC in the minority areas include persecution, torture, disappearances, extrajudicial executions, forcible conscription of children in the armed forces, widespread rape, demolition of places of worship, forced relocation, and forced labor. To a lesser extent, violations are also being carried out by ethnic insurgent groups fighting the government. At present, no less than half a million people are internally displaced in just the eastern part of the country. More than a million have fled to neighboring nations of Thailand, Malaysia, India, Bangladesh and china in search of asylum. The causes of displacement are not restricted to conflict alone. Hundreds of thousands of people, all over the country, have been displaced in areas where armed conflict has come to an end due to human rights abuses by the military, large-scale development and infrastructure projects, and schemes to resettle the urban poor. The most widespread form of displacement in Burma is migration to gain a secure livelihood, with its root causes linked to decades of poor governance and the underdevelopment of peripheral areas populated by ethnic minorities. Migration is often the only option available to poor and marginalized people and while they would not be considered internally displaced persons according to the UN guiding principles on internal displacement,4 such migrants are extremely vulnerable. As their movement is frequently non-voluntary, this type of population movement may also constitute forced migration.5 The guiding principles confer upon national authorities the primary duty and responsibility to provide protection and humanitarian assistance to internally displaced persons (IDPS) within their jurisdiction. Additionally they grant internally displaced persons the right to request and to receive protection and humanitarian assistance from these authorities. The principles state that international humanitarian organizations have the right to offer their services in support of the internally displaced, and authorities shall not arbitrarily withhold consent, particularly when they are unable or unwilling to provide the required assistance. In the case of Burma, the national authorities are largely responsible for the displacement of people and the IDP issue has acquired political sensitivity. The government does not allow international agencies to access the displaced. The displaced don’t identify themselves as there is no advantage to coming forward. Far from providing assistance and protection in areas of government jurisdiction, the authorities refuse to recognize the existence of internally displaced people. The IDP situation in Burma is very complex and dynamic. Due to a lack of international access and the constant internal movement of people as a result of government harassment and the overall failure of state institutions, it is difficult to be precise about exactly who should be considered internally displaced. What is clear, however, is that displacement is a widespread phenomenon and few displaced people have been able to achieve stability in their lives. Specific criteria for the achievement and sustainability of durable solutions to internal displacement include: legal integration indicated by freedom of movement, protection against forcible return, non-discrimination, the ability to exercise land, property and citizenship rights; social integration or the right to participate fully and equally in public at all levels and equal access to public service; and economic integration or access to employment, self-sufficiency, and the capacity for achieving viable livelihoods.6 The Guiding Principles envision three possible solutions for the end of displacement: return of IDPS to their original homes; integration in the localities where they went following displacement; and resettlement in another part of the country. These solutions have been elusive for most of the displaced. Many people in Burma have been on the move for 40 years and displaced multiple times. Displacement is an ongoing process; a vast number of those displaced decades ago are still without a durable solution and may be mixed up with newly displaced people. The root causes of displacement have not been addressed or resolved and there has been no genuine national reconciliation. National protection is still very much broken down, or altogether absent, in parts of the country. The ceasefires between the government and the ethnic armies are not political settlements, and in states where ceasefire agreements have taken place, displacement is an ongoing phenomenon, often related to violation of land rights and other human rights abuses. Although it is possible that some of the internally displaced persons, especially in ceasefire areas, may have acquired a certain level of economic or social integration, integration from a human rights/legal perspective remains beyond the grasp of the displaced in Burma. Responding to the needs of Burma’s internally displaced population is difficult because their requirements are diverse and the population is not living in camp-like settings. A number of the displaced may not want to return to their original homes, especially those who have moved many dozens of times over the years. In assessments, some Burmese IDPS have maintained that they would like to remain where they are if conditions improve. All these factors make the internal displacement situation in Burma an intractable one, and present a series of challenges to those wanting to improve the lives of the displaced. The majority of the data for this report was gathered during two assessment missions in the latter half of 2005: one to Burma and the other to Thailand. During the course of these missions, refugees international interviewed internally displaced people living in a village in Karen State in Burma, groups providing cross-border assistance, ethnic organizations working to assist Burmese refugees in Thailand, and un, non-governmental organization (NGO) personnel and donors on both sides of the border. While the RI team was in Burma, the UN and NGO expatriate staff were facing the worst government-imposed restrictions in years, which greatly limited their ability to oversee their programs outside of the capital Rangoon. Some restrictions have been relaxed since then, particularly for organizations in the health sector, and more expatriate staff are now able to travel to the field to monitor projects. RI also acquired information on conditions of IDPS during refugee focused missions between 2003-2005, in Malaysia, Bangladesh, India and Thailand. On these missions, RI interviewed recent arrivals, many of whom were former IDPS from Burma’s eastern borders belonging to the Karen, Karenni, Mon and Shan ethnic groups; others were from Burma’s western borders, such as the Chin and Rohingya ethnic groups. * In 1989 the English name of the country was changed from Burma to Myanmar by the Burmese military regime. Using either Burma or Myanmar has since become a highly politicized issue. Ethnic groups that are not ethnic Burman regard the name change as part of an effort to “Burmanize” national culture. Refugees International uses the name Burma. |
Main Page Executive Summary Introduction Types of Displacement and Conditions of the Displaced Population Humanitarian Response Inside Burma The Debate Over Aid and Engagement Rationale for International Assistance Inside Burma Towards a More Effective Response to Internal Displacement Refugees International's Recommendations --------------- Acknowledgements Glossary Notes |
 |
|
Ending the Waiting Game: Introduction
Search
Stay Informed
Resources
What I can do to help
Your support helps us save lives throughout the world.
Ways You Can Help
Photo Gallery
ViewVisual Mission: The humanitarian impact of restricted movement in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
Closures and curfews have led to a breakdown of preventive medical services. The city of Hebron is just one example. The city is divided into two areas, H-1 and H-2. There are four I ...
Go to Photo Gallery
Act Now!
|
|