_edited.png)
Addressing Rumors and Allegations: Are Muslims in Arakan Being Discriminately Suppressed?
News Analysis, October 26, 2026
The questions surrounding Muslim residents in Arakan remain challenging for both international stakeholders and domestic authorities, regardless of who governs the region. Some reports estimate that between 200,000 and 500,000 Muslims currently live in Arakan, across territories controlled by the United League of Arakan (ULA)-led Arakkha government and those under the military junta. However, discussions about Muslims in Arakan must recognize the diversity of Muslim communities across northern, central, and southern Arakan.
Arakan is home to different Muslim communities, including Chittagonian Bengali Muslims commonly identified as Rohingya, Kaman Muslims, and Myedu Muslims, who mainly live in Thandwe Township. Yet, public debates about Muslims in Arakan often focus primarily on the "Rohingya" population, which is concentrated in northern Arakan, with a smaller population in central Arakan.
In recent days, allegations have circulated that the Arakkha government discriminates against and suppresses Muslims. Some individual observers, including Paul Greening, have reported claims that do not always reflect the realities on the ground, even if their intentions are good. Certain Muslim media outlets, including Maungdaw Daily News, Rohingya Khobor, and Bay of Bengal Post, have also published reports critical of the Arakan Army (AA), sometimes relying on unverified claims or presenting only part of the story. Such reporting makes it necessary to examine the facts carefully rather than accept every allegation as established truth.
One of the main allegations concerns restrictions on freedom of movement, particularly the claim that Muslims face excessive travel requirements that prevent them from accessing medical care, employment, markets, and business opportunities.
However, the security situation differs significantly between northern and central Arakan. While central Arakan has not experienced the same Muslim militant activities associated with the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) and the Rohingya Solidarity Organisation (RSO), northern Arakan continues to face security challenges, including in areas around Maungdaw and the Bangladesh border.
Local authorities therefore have reasons to introduce security measures, including curfews and travel documentation requirements. These measures are related to local security conditions and are not necessarily directed against Muslims as a community.
Paul Greening recently claimed that Muslim residents in central Arakan must obtain three separate travel documents (from village administrator, police and party office), costing a total of 10,000 kyats, even for movement between villages. According to the information provided by local observers, however, this description does not accurately reflect the general situation.
Travel documents may be required for movement between townships or districts in certain areas, depending on security conditions, but ordinary travel between villages does not generally require such documents, particularly in more stable areas such as Paletwa, Taungup, Anjanapura (Minbya) and Thandwe. Where documentation is required, the same security rules may apply to both Arakanese and Muslim residents in the unstable districts like Maungdaw and Kyaukphyu.
The local information also indicates that the relevant document fee is generally 2,000 kyats, collected by the village administrator. In Muslim villages, the Muslim administrator may collect the fee for their office use. Administrators are also encouraged not to charge people who cannot afford it. According to these accounts, additional documents from the police department or ULA offices are not generally required for ordinary domestic travel. Such requirements should therefore not be presented as universal rules without reliable evidence.
Access to medical care also requires a clear understanding of local procedures. According to the information provided, residents can travel for medical treatment when they have a recommendation from the township medical department explaining their medical condition or circumstances. Requirements involving two guarantors apply to travel outside Arakan, such as to Bangladesh, rather than to ordinary domestic medical travel. In fact, many Muslims mainly travel to Bangladesh freely for medical reason which Rakhines cannot mostly do.
International observers and media organizations should therefore exercise caution when reporting on these sensitive issues. Responsible reporting requires distinguishing verified facts from allegations, recognizing differences between townships, and considering the security conditions that shape local policies. At the same time, authorities should communicate their rules clearly and ensure that security measures do not become unnecessary barriers to essential services.
Ultimately, the people of Arakan, including Muslims, deserve security, dignity, and the opportunity to live peacefully. Allegations of discrimination should be investigated fairly, while genuine security threats should not be ignored.
Increasing militant activities by ARSA and other armed groups in northern Arakan could create further difficulties for communities that simply want to live and work in peace. Neither unverified accusations nor the dismissal of legitimate concerns will help resolve these challenges. Accurate information, responsible reporting, and fair administration are essential to building trust among all communities in Arakan.
