Exposing One-Sided Propaganda by a Bangladeshi Journalist in The Diplomat

Kyaw Zan, Article Analysis March 4, 2026

Cover of the Article in The Diplomat

Md. Himel Rahman's article, published on February 27, 2026, in The Diplomat, paints the Arakan Army (AA) as a major threat to Bangladesh's economy. He lists several wrongdoings: disrupting trade, running illicit businesses, kidnapping fishermen, and worsening the refugee crisis. These claims frame the AA as harmful and blame it for economic losses in Bangladesh.

However, these points rely on one-sided views. They lack solid facts, clear logic, and strong evidence. This is not the first time Rahman has written negative pieces about the AA. In recent months, he published similar attacks, and the GAN team has already given clear, point-by-point replies.

The real issue lies not just in Rahman's views, but in his possible ties to certain officials in Bangladesh's border security or intelligence agencies. These officials seem to feed him biased information, leading to dishonest articles on a respected platform like The Diplomat.

From the ground realities along the Arakan-Bangladesh border, the GAN team closely watches events and offers a factual response to each claim.

1. Disruption of Trade and Economic Harm

The article says the AA bans vessel movement, seizes ships, and extorts taxes, causing a sharp drop in trade. In truth, the decline in trade between Naypyidaw and Dhaka has little to do with the AA.

The Myanmar junta blocked trade routes from Yangon to Teknaf to stop tax money from reaching the AA. At the same time, Bangladesh blocked trade with Maungdaw after the AA took control. This was a deliberate strategy to pressure the United League of Arakan (ULA) leadership. Both governments made policy choices that hurt trade—not the AA.

2. Engagement in Illicit Activities

Rahman accuses the AA of smuggling food, cement, fertilizers, oil, and medicines from Bangladesh to Rakhine, plus running narcotics and human trafficking.

Since Dhaka blocked official trade with Arakan (unlike India's Mizoram state, which kept channels open), local people in Arakan have few options for basic goods. They turn to informal cross-border trade for survival. The ULA/AA does not push or encourage it—it simply happens because of the blockade.

The drug trade claim is old and baseless. Dhaka pushes this story without proof, but few accept it except the Myanmar junta, the AA's main rival. Even BGB officials admit that over 80% of drugs (like yaba) enter via sea routes, controlled by the Myanmar junta navy and Bangladesh navy—not the AA.

Human trafficking of (Rohingya) refugees into Bangladesh also lacks sense. Many smugglers and traffickers come from the Muslim community and operate for profit, mostly inside Bangladesh's refugee camps. The AA is not the driver here.

3. Kidnapping and Hostage-taking

The article claims the AA abducts Bangladeshi fishermen in the Naf River and Bay of Bengal, demands ransoms, and denies Bangladesh its maritime rights.

In reality, the AA has never abducted legitimate Bangladeshi fishermen. It has detained hundreds of illegal fishermen who crossed into Arakan waters. BGB authorities themselves confirm this: the AA only acts in Arakan waters, not Bangladesh's. The author ignores this basic distinction.

The ULA does not demand ransoms from poor families. It seeks fair taxes from business owners to promote mutual benefits across the Naf River. On humanitarian grounds, the ULA has released at least 250 detained illegal fishermen.

Arakan Army Released Over 73 Fishermen on February 16, 2026 (photocrd)

4. Contribution to Refugee Crisis and Regional Instability

Rahman states that AA actions forced over 150,000 Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh, straining the economy. This number is inflated and polarized. Dhaka and some UN agencies push high figures to attract more international aid and attention.

In reality, if 150,000 had fled recently, few Muslims would remain in Maungdaw and Buthidaung—but the opposite is true. Some refugee families have even returned to Arakan due to violence and religious pressure in the camps. Independent estimates put new arrivals between 20,000 and 50,000, not 150,000.

More importantly, the key reasons of the refugee exodus are not due to AA's actions but trade and humanitarian blockages by Dhaka resulting in more hardship socioeconomic lives for the local communities.

Readers can now judge which side offers facts and logic. Rahman may publish on a well-known platform like The Diplomat, but that does not make his claims true. His narrative is one-sided and baseless.

The real truth along the Naf River comes from on-the-ground realities and clear thinking—not propaganda. Honest dialogue and mutual respect between Arakan and Bangladesh would serve both sides better than biased attacks.