Recent UN Conference and Extremist Agenda of So-Called Rohingya Groups

Oo Kyaw Thar, Contributing Author

Global Arakan Network October 4, 2025

Bangagya Speaker, Wai Wai Nu at the UN Conference (photcrd)

In 2017, the world watched in horror as hundreds of thousands of Muslim people fled northern Arakan into Bangladesh, driven out by the Myanmar military’s brutal campaign of killings, looting, and arson. The violence drew international condemnation and placed the so-called “Rohingya crisis” at the center of global human rights debates. Yet nearly a decade later, the issue remains unresolved — and dangerously misunderstood.

Today, it is said that close to 1.1 million people remain stranded in refugee camps in Bangladesh. The government in Dhaka, forced to shoulder the burden of their survival, is deeply entangled in a problem that has both humanitarian and security dimensions. Meanwhile, the political realities inside Myanmar have shifted dramatically after the military coup. The military junta no longer controls much of Arakan; instead, the Arakan Army has emerged as the de facto authority, governing large areas and inevitably becoming a key actor in this crisis.

At the High-Level Conference on Rohingya Muslims and Other Minorities held at the United Nations on October 30, 2025, Bangladesh’s Chief Adviser, Dr. Muhammad Yunus, presented a seven-point roadmap, urging pressure on both the Myanmar military and the Arakan Army.

Pressuring the military — the original perpetrators of mass atrocities — is justifiable. But placing pressure on the Arakan Army, which has shown pragmatism in managing the issue, is both unrealistic and counterproductive. If the international community genuinely seeks a sustainable solution, it must recognize the complex roots of the problem, including the Arakanese people’s own perspective.

The Arakanese Perspective: Beyond Human Rights

Global discourse frames the Rohingya question largely in terms of human rights. But for the Arakanese, it is inseparably linked to national security, history, and cultural survival.

On the security front, Arakan’s population of around five million stands in stark contrast to neighboring Bangladesh’s 175 million. For decades, porous borders, corruption, and colonial-era population flows have enabled waves of Muslim migration into Arakan. This demographic imbalance fuels longstanding anxieties. Memories of the 1942 violence — when armed Muslim groups carried out brutal attacks on local communities — remain deeply etched in the Arakanese collective memory, shaping their security anxieties across generations. Those fears are further reinforced today as Islamist militant groups such as ARSA, RSO, and ARA continue to wage attacks against non-Muslim communities in northern Arakan.

Historically, the very term “Rohingya” is contested. Most Burmese and Arakanese view it as a politically manufactured identity, designed to legitimize territorial and cultural claims. In their eyes, so-called Rohingya activists distort history to present themselves as indigenous to Arakan — a narrative that threatens to erase centuries of Arakan heritage and identity. To the Arakanese, this is not a matter of semantics but one of safeguarding ancestral identity against cultural erasure.

The international community’s tendency to dismiss these fears, while painting the Rohingya exclusively as victims, only deepens resentment. Yet the reality is more complex: under the administration of the Arakan People’s Revolutionary Government, Muslims have held local responsibilities and enjoyed rights such as freedom of movement, livelihoods, and basic security. AA Chief Major General Twan Myat Naing has publicly affirmed the need for Muslims to have full citizenship rights. These nuances are often overlooked in international debates.

The Hidden Agenda Behind “Rohingya” Claims

The assumption that the Rohingya simply seek recognition and repatriation underplays their political ambitions. Activists and armed groups frequently frame themselves as “the first people of Arakan” and invoke concepts like the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and Self-Determination — aspirations pointing well beyond human rights discourse.

Bangladesh, whether intentionally or not, has created space for this trajectory. Within its refugee camps, armed groups have found room to recruit, train, and raise funds. While Border Guard Bangladesh officially denies providing support, many sources have stated that recurring border incidents suggest at least a degree of tolerance and tactical and convert support for the militants inside Bangladesh. To the Arakanese, this amounts to a direct threat to their sovereignty.

At the same time, so-called Rohingya activists wage an information war, portraying the AA as perpetrators in the eyes of the international community. Such narratives may win sympathy abroad, but on the ground, they erode trust and sabotage coexistence. Casting the so-called Rohingya solely as victims while painting the Arakanese as aggressors distorts reality and hardens divisions between the communities.

New ARSA Leader Instigating Holy War From Bangladesh

The uncomfortable truth is that many organizations and activists are not merely struggling for coexistence but pushing for an autonomous and exclusive Muslim zone in northern Arakan. Such a foothold could, in time, fuel calls for broader Islamic expansion in the region. This is the existential fear that underpins Arakanese resistance — and one that the international community must acknowledge if it wishes to engage constructively.

Human rights must remain universal. But they cannot be wielded as tools to erase history, annex land, or ignite religious conflicts. If peace is the goal, simplistic victim–villain narratives must be abandoned in favor of understanding the actual complexities at play.

Toward a Realistic Solution

Safe and dignified repatriation of Muslims remains an essential goal. Yet the reality on the ground in northern Arakan is stark: daily airstrikes, military offensives, and blockades have created a humanitarian crisis that affects all civilians — Arakanese, Muslim, and other minorities. These conditions cannot be overlooked if a lasting solution is to be found.

The key lies in recognizing the authority of United League of Arakan (ULA)-led government. As the de facto authority in much of the region, the Arakan Army must be part of any durable settlement, including any future repatriation process. Attempting to pressure or sideline the Arakan Army risks alienating the only actor currently capable of enforcing order and facilitating coexistence at the local level. Constructive engagement, rather than confrontation, is the more pragmatic path.

RSO Terrorists Near BGB Camps inside Bangladesh

Equally important is sustained humanitarian support for Arakan. Beyond addressing urgent needs created by war, displacement, and economic blockades, such assistance can contribute to the broader state-building process.

The international community must therefore move beyond short-term relief and invest in equitable support that strengthens local governance, infrastructure, and community resilience. Only through such fair and balanced engagement can aid contribute not merely to survival but also to long-term stability and self-reliance in Arakan.

Finally, the concerns and anxieties of the Arakanese must be respected. Any solution imposed from outside that disregards these fears will only deepen mistrust and division. A settlement that acknowledges both universal human rights and the lived realities of local communities, however, holds the potential to build trust, bridge divides, and move the region closer to genuine peace.

Oo Kyaw Thar is the pen name of a freelance political analyst from Arakan. He regularly observes Arakan affairs, covering topics such as armed clashes, identity politics, social cohesion, and peace in the Arakan region and its borderlands with Bangladesh.