Imagine being trafficked, tortured, and abused only to then be subjected to arbitrary detention on a prison island at the hands of your “rescuers.” Rather than being the plot of the latest Hollywood thriller, this is the real experience of the first group of Rohingya refugees and genocide survivors on Bhasan Char - a remote artificial silt island, converted into a prison-like refugee camp by Bangladesh authorities, in the Bay of Bengal.
Officials initially transferred trafficking survivors there under the pretext of COVID-19 containment measures, framing the move as temporary; it soon became prolonged, arbitrary detention. Although some survivors were eventually returned to mainland camps, the project expanded, and more than 34,000 refugees have now been relocated to Bhasan Char—many through coercion, and others through false promises and misinformation about conditions on the island.
The brainchild of the tyrannical, now fugitive, former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, the project nonetheless received UN and international donor backing to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. Bangladesh, itself not a wealthy country, also squandered US$300 million on just the set-up of what the current Bangladesh administration has now labelled a “failed project.”
Bangladesh’s post-Hasina interim administration, led by Nobel laureate Dr. Mohammed Yunus, should now clearly commit to closing Bhasan Char, and safely returning the island’s inhabitants to their families and friends on the mainland. But we must also ask ourselves - what lessons need to be learned to avoid another failure like Bhasan Char?
The blame for all this isn’t Bangladesh’s alone to take. By ignoring the rights and views clearly expressed by Rohingya refugees, the UN and international donor nations have enabled an abusive regime on Bhasan Char
The reason why Bhasan Char’s first internees were trafficking survivors was simply because they weren’t given a choice–they were transferred directly from their traffickers to the island. If they had a choice, they, and the tens of thousands that followed them, very likely would have chosen to return to their homes on the mainland. This lack of volition and respect for the rights and views of Rohingya refugees themselves, has been the hallmark of the Bhasan Char experiment.
In our latest report, our organszation Fortify Rights, consistently documented instances of forced relocations and coercive transfers to Bhasan Char. The more than 100 Rohingya refugees we spoke with to develop the report described at length the coercive, misleading, and underhand tactics Bangladeshi authorities used to force Rohingya to relocate to Bhasan Char. These methods included making promises of material benefits, such as employment and monthly cash payments, and prioritisation for third-country resettlement - none of which ever fully materialised.
Once on the island, Rohingya faced and continue to face an oppressive regime of constant surveillance, barbed wire, and guard towers. Compounding these prison-like conditions is the fact that Rohingya wishing to officially leave the island, even temporarily, face a bewildering, and often insurmountable, array of bureaucratic obstacles, and often ending in refusal. This has resulted in Rohingya refugees missing opportunities to visit ill and dying relatives on the mainland, being absent from important family gatherings, and waiting months to receive specialist medical attention. It has also driven refugees to engage smugglers in dangerous, often catastrophic escape attempts.
But the blame for all this isn’t Bangladesh’s alone to take. By ignoring the rights and views clearly expressed by Rohingya refugees, the UN and international donor nations have enabled an abusive regime on Bhasan Char.
Although confining refugees to floating prisons is a policy proposal, thankfully, only actively pursued by a small minority of governments, it conforms with broader and highly damaging trend in refugee policy—often referred to as “warehousing.”
“Warehousing” is where refugees are confined in camps or other detention-like settings, without freedom of movement, for indefinite periods. Unable to work or even move outside of these settings, refugees are forced to accept a life of isolation, idleness, and aid dependency. This practice denies refugees basic human rights and often results in avoidable social problems, which have impacts beyond refugee camps.
Cynically, the practice has also been used to apply pressure to refugees to return home, often prematurely to situations of continued violence and persecution.
UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, knows “warehousing” all too well - in fact, the agency has participated and led forums engaged in defining the phenomenon, and has witnessed its negative impacts in multiple refugee contexts globally. And yet, in October 2021, UNHCR signed an agreement with the Bangladesh government codifying and essentially endorsing the mass warehousing of Rohingya refugees on Bhasan Char. Despite the clear evidence presented by Fortify Rights and others at the time of the coercive nature of transfers to the island, as well as the freedom of movement issues we have raised directly with them, UNHCR continues to support Bhasan Char as an appropriate place for refugees. The justifications for this continued endorsement are for UNHCR to provide.
Although at the extreme end of warehousing, the restrictions faced by the residents of Bhasan Char are not so different from those faced by Rohingya refugees on the mainland. There too, refugees face extreme movement restrictions, a ban on employment, and other denials of basic freedoms.
As many Bangladeshis we’ve spoken to have rightfully pointed out, the Rohingya refugee crisis places a unsustainable strain on Bangladesh’s limited resources, especially in the face of decreasing levels international support. It’s exactly for this reason, however, that Bangladesh’s current and future leaders, as well as the international community, need to end their support for white elephants like Bhasan Char. Instead, they must commit themselves to rights-respecting solutions that present a win for refugees and Bangladeshis alike. These should include livelihood opportunities so that Rohingya can be increasingly self-reliant and not dependent on dwindling aid, and skills-building support so that when the Rohingya can finally return home in peace and security, they can start to rebuild their homes, communities, and lives.
* Patrick Phongsathorn is a Senior Advocacy Specialist and Zaw Win is a Senior Human Rights Specialist at Fortify Rights
* The views expressed her are the writers' own