Recognizing the importance of mastering English as an international language in increasing global competition, Nakhon Pathom Rajabhat University (NPRU), Thailand in cooperation with Southeast Asian Social Studies Center (CESASS) UGM held NPRU Summer Program at CESASS.

Started from 27 May 2017 – 20 June 2017, the program was attended by 14 students from Nakhon Pathom Rajabhat University and was accompanied by 8 buddies from Universitas Gadjah Mada. In addition to learning English, a tour of Yogyakarta and its surrounding attractions also become the agenda in this program.

“Hopefully, in NPRU Summer Program at CESASS, NPRU students from Thailand can know about Indonesian culture, especially Yogyakarta tradition,” said Andi Awaludin Fitrah, M.A as the representative of CESASS in the opening ceremony which took place on Tuesday (29/05/2017) at CESASS. The opening ceremony was followed by remarks from Nakhon Pathom Rajabhat University and ended with introduction among program participants. (Varrel)

Education is one of the key factors in strengthening the spirit of togetherness among countries in Southeast Asia as a nation community. It also underlies the Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies Gadjah Mada University to open wide opportunities for students from neighboring countries in Southeast Asia and other countries who want to exchange insights and share social-cultural experience.

On Monday (29/05/2017), CESASS received four students from Mahidol University, Thailand in a sharing session held at CESASS office. The four students are Nisanat Watthayu (Faculty of Liberal Arts), Yosita Jampafeung (Faculty of Liberal Arts), Thanatcha Somchaimongkol (Faculty of Liberal Arts) and Warachote Shinwasusin (Faculty of Engineering) who were the recipients of the Backpack Scholarship, a program devoted to explore the ASEAN region and visit campuses with the aim of enhancing global insight, developing sociability skills, and speaking for Thai students. These four students were also ambassadors of the Mahidol University International Relations (MURI) program which aims to support the international cooperation program of Mahidol University.

In this sharing session, four students from Mahidol University presented about MURI program, campus, and activities they have done to participate in the learning process and cultural exchange in Southeast Asia. Indonesia became a country they chose to visit because of their cultural wealth, while UGM was chosen because of its reputation as the oldest university in Indonesia. “We chose Indonesia because Indonesia and Thailand have many similarities, such as the culture and characteristics of its people,” said Warachote Shinwasusin. In addition, Nisanat Watthayu also told us that he had many friends from UGM. “I have many friends from UGM so we also want to visit them here and interact directly,” he said. The sharing session was closed with lunch and a tour around the campus. (Meike)

In the framework of the 50th anniversary of ASEAN, the Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies (CESASS) in cooperation with the Mission of Japan to ASEAN held an international seminar entitled “Strengthening Japan and ASEAN Relations on the Ocassion of the ASEAN 50th Anniversary”. This seminar was a manifestation of CESASS UGM’s commitment in developing studies on Southeast Asia and its relationship with other countries outside the region. In this activity, CESASS provided a special study on strengthening the relationship between Japan and ASEAN in social perspective.

CESASS and Mission of Japan to ASEAN hope this activity can provide knowledge and developmental study about cooperation relationship between ASEAN and Japan. Furthermore, this seminar was expected to be a bridge for ASEAN and Japan to be able to conduct further cooperation that can benefit the entire people of Indonesia and ASEAN.

The event was held on Wednesday, March 29, 2017 held at UGM Library Seminar Room 2nd Floor. This event was opened by Dr. phil. Hermin Indah Wahyuni as Head of CESASS, Dr. Anna Marie Wattie as Director of Partnership, Alumni, and Cooperation at the same time H.E. Kazuo Sunaga, Ambassador of Japan to ASEAN.

Speakers in this seminar were the Ambassador of Japan to ASEAN, H.E. Kazuo Sunaga; Muhammad Rum (lecturer of Department of International Relations UGM), and Prof. Tri Widodo, Ph.D. (lecturer of Department of Economics UGM as well as researcher at CESASS). The three speakers invited the seminar participants to discuss the development of relations between ASEAN and Japan from various perspectives.

Japanese Ambassador to ASEAN, H.E. Kazuo Sunaga gave exposure to the background of the establishment of ASEAN and Japan cooperation as well as the cooperation that has occurred between the two regions. Meanwhile, Prof. Tri Widodo, Ph.D presented the space for strengthening economic cooperation that can be done between ASEAN and Japan. Finally, Muhammad Rum, S.IP., I.M.A.S. gave a presentation on the Benelux effect of the ASEAN-Japan cooperation in a regional political security perspective. In general, participants gained knowledge from speakers about ASEAN-Japan cooperation comprehensively.

Furthermore, after the material’s presentation by the speakers, the participants were given the opportunity to ask questions. There were two participants who were given the opportunity to ask the question: Tiara from Sebelas Maret University and Anita from Universitas Gadjah Mada. Then the event ended at 16.30 with a souvenir to Ambassador H.E Kazuo, Prof. Tri Widodo, and Muhammad Rum, S.I.P, I.M.A.S.

—

This article was written by Nela Navida, an intern at CESASS UGM.

The production of knowledge that occurs due to the social interaction of Indonesian students in Egypt, especially at Al-Azhar University, has a major role in the formation of a cosmopolitan identity. In this context, the daily social conditions of students in Egypt are more influential in the production of knowledge than the academic background. This was conveyed by Prof. Dr. Judith Schlehe, Professor of the Department of Anthropology at the University of Freiburg, in a discussion of SEA-Talks # 14 on Friday (07/04). The discussion entitled “Student Mobility & Knowledge Migration: Indonesian Azharites as Cultural Agents” was held at the office of Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies (CESASS) UGM.

Quoting Vertovec and Cohen (2002), Prof. Schlehe explained that to form a cosmopolitan identity, Indonesian students must engage socio-cultural interactives that are cross-cultural. Instead of being a boundary or a separator, the constructions between self and others and cultural differences must be appreciated and must encourage interaction. It means that the reproduction of knowledge to form a cosmopolitan identity will occur if Indonesian students interact with the Egyptians in an inter-cultural context.

Even so, based on research conducted by prof. Schlehe in Indonesian student dormitory in Cairo, inter-cultural interaction happened rarely. Indonesian students only interacted in a very homogeneous space, with Indonesian fellow students in their dormitory. In fact, they were not friendly with the Egyptians. In addition, the interaction space within the campus was also minimal because many Indonesian students at Al-Azhar University rarely (46%) or even never (17%) followed the lectures. This was probably because many Indonesian students in Egypt, especially Cairo, had to work to pay for their living. Moreover, there was a context or institution that bound them to the country of origin, namely Indonesia. This institution for example was a regional dormitory established by the local government in Egypt. These dormitory facilitated their interaction with fellow Indonesian students, making them difficult to expand social interactions outside the ‘safe’ zone. This condition was very different from that in Alexandria. Indonesian students there hung out with the Egyptians because no institution bound them to Indonesia and at least Indonesians in Alexandria.

The lack of interaction with the Egyptians made the Indonesian students in Cairo unable to deconstruct the image of the negative and stereotypical Egyptians. In fact, these images they got were from stories told by their colleagues and from the media, not from personal experience. The attributes that Indonesian students associated to Egyptians are rude, stealing, dirty, dangerous, and oppressive towards women. According to Prof. Schlehe, this shows how Indonesian students were construing the boundaries between self and others by emphasizing the moral inferiority of the other.

From the results of ethnographic research that Prof. Schlehe explained, she drew the conclusion that cultural hybridization and the reproduction of knowledge that could encourage cosmopolitan identity and pluralism did not occur. This was because Indonesian students excluded themselves from intercultural interactions. In fact, Prof. Schlehe emphasized that cosmopolitanism and pluralism will only be formed if the production of knowledge of Indonesian alumni and students in Egypt took place within the wider scope of social space, not only in a homogeneous and limited community. (Anggi)

Sawatdi Khrab!

My name is Jusuf, or commonly called Ucup. In this article, I will share my experience in joining the Liberal Arts of ASEAN Seeds Camp III, 9-14 January 2017 organized by Thammasat University in Rangsit, Thailand.

The event was held for six days in several cities, such as Rangsit, Ayuthaya, Kumphaeng Phet, and Sukhothai. There we visited the tourist areas and crafts. While in Sukhothai, we visited Ram Kamhaeng Museum, Sukhothai Historical Park, Sukhothai Airport, Haad Siew traditional weaving industry, and Sukhothai clay craft center. The schedule of activities was quite compact. Every day, the event started at 6:00 am and ended at 8:00 pm, except at a certain time when we were discharged early because we had to move on to the city.

All participants were divided into five groups, and each group was required to create a project to be presented on the last day of the camp. The projects presented would then be assessed and ranked by the committee. The theme of the project should be in accordance with the theme of the program, namely Promoting Thai Wisdom; efforts to promote the culture and wisdom of the Thai tradition and related to the various activities that participants had followed from the first day.

Inspired by the cultural heritage of Thai culture, my group decided to make Sukho Ruin Lamp, a lamp made of ceramic fragments. For us, the project was interesting because the product doesn’t only met the needs of consumers, but also utilizes the unused goods and promotes the cultural identity of Thailand. In addition, we added other products to support sales of such lamps, such as scented candles and perfume. We also included the business design of the product, related to the recommended selling price, sales tactics, and where this product would be marketed.

Although our group did not get the first rank, but we were all still happy. I had a variety of valuable experiences. The opportunity to meet friends from different countries, especially ASEAN countries, had opened my eyes to the diversity of cultures, traditions, beliefs and languages. I also gained experience working in a multicultural group. In this collaboration we were encouraged to study, communicate, and make decisions in diverse cultural contexts.

Although it was not easy, but I felt there was an important concept, namely understanding. In one seminar with Cross Culture theme, the concept of understanding was described as a fundamental concept to understand the existence of a ‘cultural barrier’ in the process of different cultural interactions, so that interaction could provide a solution to the problems at hand and this did not lead to a conflict. One example I experienced there was the difference in language, which became one of the inhibiting factors in communicating. However, understanding that we were in a different cultural context became the key to interaction. If any participant did not understand, he or she could request re-elucidation without any objections. Such deep insight became the key to a diverse intercultural interaction.

There were several things I noted during the visit of this program. First, I realized that the Thai government greatly appreciated their cultural heritage. This could be seen from various archaeological sites that were managed and well maintained. For example, the museum implemented strict rules and a number of staff escorted us when visiting there. In addition, these artifacts were arranged in such a way that looked interesting. This could be an example for the Indonesian government in maintaining various historical relics, given that Indonesia has a lot of valuable historical heritage for Indonesia and the world. Such as Borobudur Temple, Prambanan Temple, Mendhut Temple, and others.

Secondly, I also saw how the efforts of Thammasat University, or Thailand in facing globalization in the context of the ASEAN Economic Community (MEA). For me, this program showed Thailand’s readiness in preparing their generation to welcome the ASEAN Economic Community. The presence of the ASEAN Studies department at Thammassat University also showed their seriousness in preparing themselves in the community of ASEAN. The existence of the ASEAN Seeds Campaign Liberal Arts program could be seen as the business of Thammasat and Thailand universities to promote Thai tourism, where we as participants were required to generate new potential ideas that could be developed as an effort to develop Thai tourism products in the future. Surely this needed to be a reflective record for all of us. In today’s era of globalization, Thailand reminds us of the need to prepare in the MEA competition marketplace. I suppose this could be an example for us together in preparing for the future.

Kob Khun Khrab!

—

This article was written by Jusuf Ariz Wahyuono

Within Southeast Asia, regionalism is now a familiar concept. There are various regional bodies within Asia that have been formed, including the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), Association for Southeast Asia (ASA), MAPHILINDO, and Asian and Pacific Council (ASPAC). However, regionalism has not always been present within the region. In 1979, Wong argued that there were a number of barriers preventing the formation of a regional unity in Southeast Asia. These factors included a strong presence of nationalism amongst states, a lack of regional trust and identity, territorial conflict, and differences in political perceptions between countries. These obstacles prevented unification until ASEAN was finally established.

In his session, Professor Tri Widodo discussed issues relating to the economy and welfare within Southeast Asia. Professor Tri Widodo gave an introduction about the history of the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN), the development of economic conditions in Southeast Asia, the theory of the establishment of ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), and  outlined some of ASEAN’s economic challenges in the future. According to Prof. Tri Widodo,  there are several macroeconomic challenges faced by Southeast Asia such as unemployment, balance of payments, fiscal expansion, and monetary policy.

It has been argued that the early establishment of ASEAN was motivated by political rather than economic factors. The formation of ASEAN was based around the reconciliation of ASEAN initiating countries. Furthermore, the motivations and objectives of ASEAN were initially focused on the integration of international politics. It has only been since 1970, that ASEAN has prioritized the evolution of its regional economic structure. This shift towards economics is demonstrated by an increased presence of economic elements within the ASEAN structure, in addition to a widespread campaign on economic integration.

The economic development of ASEAN can now be observed by its positioning as one of the largest economies in the world. In 2012, ASEAN had a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of US $2.3 billion, establishing ASEAN as the world’s seventh largest economy behind the US, China, Japan, Germany, France and the UK. The average economic growth of ASEAN between 1989 to 1989 ranged from 3.8% to 7%. To strengthen its international economic repuation, ASEAN launched the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) in 2016. The AEC’s main objectives include the unity of markets and production bases, enhancing regional economic competitiveness, equitable regional economic growth, and comprehensive regional economic integration with the world economy.

AEC is one form of regional economic integration. However, according to Prof. Tri Widodo,  the AEC has not met the requirements of the theory put forward by Balassa (1965) relating to economic integration. Balassa argues that to facilitate complete economic integration in a region, there are five stages that should be achieved by a nations’ economy, namely, (1) free trade (2) custom union, (3) common market, (4) economic union; and (5) complete integration. These five stages must be achieved in order to establish an integrated economy.

In practice, the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) is a common market form, but certain trade tarrifs exist for countries outside the ASEAN. The implication is that countries outside ASEAN can take advantage of this by entering the countries that provide the lowest rates, and trade from those countries without having to be exposed to tariffs.

The common market launched in the AEC results in the freedom of production to flow freely between countries, such as capital and labor. Despite the inconsistency with this theory, ASEAN countries have their own way of integrating the economy, and refer to this as the “ASEAN Way”. Questions arise regarding AEC’s ability to operate as a sufficient common market without tariff uniformity for countries outside ASEAN. However, Prof. Tri Widodo believes that Balassa’s theory has been well-tested, and uses the European Union (EU) as an example. The EU does not go through a single step in the theory. The outcome of ASEAN’s economic policy can only be answered by time.

Overall, there has been significant progress made since the establishment of ASEAN, and the creation of the AEC. Although there are inconsistencies with Balassa’s theory, the AEC will continue to operate in the ‘ASEAN Way’. The legitimacy of the theory of Balassa’s economic integration theory and its relationship with the ‘Asean Way’, can only be proved by its future development, and thus will be answered in time.

—

This article was written by Ruspratama Yudhawirawan (in Indonesian), an economics student, Faculty of Business and Economics, Universitas Gadjah Mada, while working as an intern at Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies (CESASS).

Many people misrepresent Southeast Asia and ASEAN. Some of them think that Southeast Asia is ASEAN, or vice versa. Then what is “Southeast Asia” and “ASEAN”? and How is the origin of “Southeast Asia” as a “study” or “area studies” ?.

According to Dr. Agus Suwignyo, Southeast Asia as an area felt not too well known. The indicator to which he is concerned is that when European societies often refer to Southeast Asians who are coming from different countries identified as the same group. Dr. Agus Suwignyo explains that the actual status of Southeast Asia can be seen from three aspects, namely as a “concept” of politics and defense, historical reality and area study.

Southeast Asia as a political and defense concept is deliberately created by and for the sake of those who have historically not come from the “Southeast Asia” region. The concept of “Southeast Asia” started from the existence of Southeast Asia Command (under Admiral Lord Louis Mountbatten) which was created with President Franklin D. Roosevelt and British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill on First Quebec Conference (August 1943) have spawned a military political dimension in Southeast Asian Region. Southeast Asia Command was used against the Japanese soldiers that ruled Southeast Asia for the first time in history. Followed by the war in Indochina and the existence of domino theory and decolonization in a narrow legal sense, and plays an important role in the acceptance of the concept of Southeast Asia [1]. Southeast Asia was also used as a geopolitical cold war that gave birth to The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 1967. This regional group then promoted economic, political and security cooperation as a counter-discourse form of the Asian-African Conference in 1955. To date, ASEAN has ten members, namely Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines, Brunei Darussalam, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar and Cambodia. Then what is the position of other countries like East Timor? East Timor has not (yet) joined ASEAN member countries, but has entered into Southeast Asia.

Secondly, as a historical reality, long before the concept of unity and government, people in Southeast Asia have come into contact. It is seen from the similarity of several languages, socio-political and culture between countries. One of the examples is the tradition of gotong royong (help each other) that is reflected in both the rural level to the greater level such as social institutions and governance. This suggests that there are similarities of value systems, social institutions, and governments, and economic modes. It is also influenced by a relatively similar source of “outer” influences from China, India, Arabia and Europe. This is further elaborated in a book entitled History of Modern Southeast Asia by Leonard Y.  Andaya who is a Professor of the History of Southeast Asia in University of Hawaii at Manoa and Barbara Watson Andaya, an Australian historian.

Finally, the status of Southeast Asia as an area studies actually began before World War II. That is when a group of scientists consisting of orientalists and epigraphers, botanists, zoologists, philologists, historians and archaeologists researching Southeast Asia. While post World War II Southeast Asian scientists mushroomed during the Cold War, but the focus of the study is mostly only in one particular area in Southeast Asia. This phenomenon leads to epistemological challenges such as the stable concept of “space” and “time” constraints within the boundaries of “Southeast Asia”, the scientific policy and the diffusionist Perspective in writing on Southeast Asia. Unfortunately Southeast Asian studies are more attractive to “outsiders” which means that there are currently quite a few experts, researchers and people interested in Southeast Asia who are indigenous “Southeast Asians”.

—

This article was written by Tania Nugraheni Ayuningtyas (in Indonesian), Tourism student, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Gadjah Mada University, while working as an intern at Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies (CESASS).

As a region that is part of the Asian continent, countries in Southeast Asia have characteristics of tropical climates with an enchanting archipelago and year-round sunshine. The landscape ranging from mountains, sea to the beach with white sand and the green tosca water almost can be found throughout this region. Not only that, the region of Southeast Asia has cultural richness of tangible and intangible. It is marked by the existence of 17 cultural heritages which has been written in the List of UNESCO World Heritage. At least, this can be an attraction for tourists around the world. It is proven by the number of significant international arrivals. Data compiled by Pacific Asia Travel Association (PATA) in 2015 recorded more than 115 million international arrivals by 2015 which is expected to reach 173 million by 2018 with a total growth of 2% annually. Thailand is included in the second rank in the category of Top Five Fastest Growth Destinations 2014 – 2018 with the highest total international arrivals of 36 million, followed by Malaysia 27.7 million, Singapore 16.7 million, while Indonesia, Cambodia, Philippines, Lao, Myanmar, Brunei Darussalam and Vietnam still at the number below 10 million arrivals in 2015.

In order to continue to develop the tourism sector, ASEAN establishes interconnectivity in tourism through ASEAN Tourism Ministers which produces an integrated tourism strategy as outlined in the ASEAN Tourism Strategic Plan (ATSP) 2016-2025. ATSP 2016-2015 focuses on two main visions. First, is improving the competitiveness of ASEAN by becoming an integrated tourism destination. Second, ensuring that tourism in ASEAN takes into account the inclusive and sustainable aspects. This is in line with the implementation of the ASEAN Tourism Strategic Plan 2016-2025 which is further described in 10 strategies of tourism sector development programs, namely promotion and marketing, product development, human resources development, tourism investment, service quality, sustainable tourism, tourism transportation facilities, tourists’ security and safety, connectivity and infrastructure, and climate change issues.

One of the ten strategies of tourism development program in ATSP 2016-2025 is on promotion strategy and tourism marketing in ASEAN. Through the website www.aseantourism.travel, tourists can access any tourism related information such as ongoing events or festivals, photos and videos of tour activities, book airline tickets or hotels, to tour referrals that will assist them in determining the itinerary of the tour. Promotion step is also pursued by the slogan “Southeast Asia feel the warmth” that presents the harmony, togetherness, unity of countries that are incorporated in this region. The slogan “Southeast Asia feel the warmth” campaigned to every country to develop products and attractions with excellence hospitality with the local wisdom of Southeast Asian society. With the integrated tourism promotion and marketing strategy, it is expected to support the realization of ASEAN as a “single destination” as mandated by the ASEAN Tourism Strategic Plan 2016-2025.

ASEAN believes that the end result of all ATSP strategies 2016 – 2025 will be able to optimize the tourism sector so that it will contribute to Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The tourism sector in Southeast Asia in 2014 has contributed 4.8% of total GDP or generated about 117.9 Billion USD, and is expected will continue to increase to 4.9% or 209.4 Billion USD in 2025. This will also impact to the growing employment opportunities in Southeast Asia as investment continues to grow.

The last hope of the interconnectivity of tourism in Southeast Asia is that this region will become a qualified tourism destination that presents the uniqueness, harmonious diversity, and committed to responsible for the development of a balanced tourism, sustainable and inclusive, therefore be able to contribute significantly to social conditions – economy for the welfare of society in Southeast Asia like the vision stated in the ASEAN Tourism Strategic Plan 2016-2025.

—

This article was written by Tania Nugraheni Ayuningtyas (in Indonesian), a student of Tourism, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada, while working as an intern at Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies (CESASS).

Since the 1970s there have been hundreds of thousands of Rohingya Muslims fleeing from Myanmar, most of them using sea routes to reach neighboring countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. However, the large number of refugees also cannot be welcomed easily by the targeted countries, due to concerns over uncontrolled influx of refugees. Indonesia is one of the few countries that can communicate directly with Myanmar on the escalation of the conflict. Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi said “Once again I conveyed Indonesia’s concerns to State Counselor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi regarding the situation in Rakhine state,” after being invited by Suu Kyi at her house for dinner while discussing openly the situation in Rakhine . [1] In addition to Indonesia, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak led a demonstration on 4 December 2016 on what he described as”genocide” of the Rohingya Muslim minority in Myanmar. Najib Razak also invites neighboring countries and the international world to move forward in suppressing the violence. [2]

Rohingya is a group of ethnic Muslim minorities who mostly live in western Myanmar, Rakhine region. It is estimated that this Rohingya ethnic group amounts to about 1 million people and adheres to Sunni Islam. This makes the ethnic Rohingya different from the dominant group that embraces Buddhism in Myanmar ethically, linguistically, and in religion. The origins of the Rohingyas can be traced from the fifteenth century when thousands of Muslims came to the kingdom of Arakan. After that there were many people who came again in the nineteenth and early twentieth century when Bengal and Rakhine were ruled by the colonial government as part of British India at that time. After gaining independence in 1948, the Burmese government changed its country’s name to Myanmar in 1989, and has since disputed Rohingya’s ethnic historical claims and denied its recognition as one of 135 ethnic groups in Myanmar. Rohingya was officially identified by the Burmese government as an illegal Bengali immigrant, despite the fact that many ethnic Rohingyas have been living in Myanmar for centuries. [3] The Myanmar government refused to grant citizenship status to the Rohingyas, and as a result most members of the group lacked legal documentation, effectively making them stateless. Although in the 1990s there was a “white card” as a temporary identity card for the Muslim community in Myanmar (mostly Rohingyas), but by 2015 this temporary identity card was abolished by President Thein Sein at the urging of the Nationalist Buddha. The ASEAN Parliament for Human Rights wrote in April 2015 that “the long persecution of Rohingyas has caused the highest outflow of marine asylum seekers (in the region) since the US war in Vietnam”. The persecution referred to is Myanmar’s government policy, including marriage restrictions, family planning, employment, education, religious choice, and freedom of movement have institutionalized systemic discrimination against the Rohingya ethnic group.

This discriminatory policy of the Burmese government is coupled with the condition of Rakhine state as Myanmar’s least developed state. World Bank estimates that 78% of households in Rakhine live below the poverty are also an additional reason why ethnic Rohingya want to get out of Myanmar. Widespread poverty, weak infrastructure, and a lack of job opportunities exacerbate the divisions between Buddhists and Muslims Rohingya. This tension is deepened by the religious differences that have been shown in many mass media several times. [4]

As the number of victims and refugee grew, indicating that the crisis will not be completed soon, and with a good ending. The first reason is ASEAN as a regional organization that includes Myanmar putting forward the principle of non-interference. This principle is the core foundation of the formation of cooperation among ASEAN member countries. This principle was first introduced in the Bangkok Declaration in 1967, which contained that ASEAN members did not want any parties outside the country to intervene in domestic affairs in order to create domestic and regional stability. [5] With this principle, ASEAN members that want to help resolve the Rohingya ethnic crisis are directly detained, and this situation is exacerbated by the Myanmar government which shows no desire to end the ongoing violence.

The second reason is Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar and Thailand (including other ASEAN countries) as some of the main destinations of Rohingya refugees have not ratified the UN Convention and Protocol on Refugees. The Refugee Status Convention, also known as the Refugee Convention in 1951, is a multilateral treaty explaining who the refugees are and setting up the rights of an asylum seeker and the responsibility of a country that accepts the asylum seeker. [6] This is particularly crucial remembering that the domestic government of Myanmar cannot cope with the ever-increasing number of casualties, but outside parties such as ASEAN member countries are also unable to assist the refugees to the maximum level due to the Convention and Protocol on Refugees and Asylum Seekers has not been ratified.

The last reason why the crisis is still far to find its way is the closeness between the Myanmar government or the National League for Democracy Party and the nationalist Buddhists in Myanmar. The National League for Democracy (NLD) led by Aung San Suu Kyi is the party that won the election in 2015, and the majority of the party’s supporters come from nationalist Buddhist groups that make this condition so dilemmatic that there is hostility between the nationalist Buddhist side and the Rohingyas and other Muslims societies in Myanmar. Even UN Human Rights chief Zeid Ra’ad Al-Hussein said that the Myanmar government, led by Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi had taken a “superficial, counterproductive, even heartless” approach to the ongoing crisis. [7] He also said that reports of murder, incitement and burning of Rohingya ethnic homes every day.

The crisis that cannot be controlled by the government is already quite severe, but the government of Myanmar has not yet given access to the UN to enter the conflict area. Ravina Shamdasani as one of the spokespersons of the UN Human Rights section added “If the government (Myanmar) does not hide something, then why is there such reluctance to grant us access?  Remembering the continuing failure to grant access, we can only be afraid of the worst situation. “[8]

REFERENCES:

[1] Tama Salim, ‘Indonesia raises Rohingya concerns with Suu Kyi: Retno’, The Jakarta Post (daring), 8 Desember 2016, <http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/12/08/indonesia-raises-rohingya-concerns-with-suu-kyi-retno.html>, diakses 13 Desember 2016.

[2] The Guardian, Malaysia PM urges world to act against ‘genocide’ of Myanmar’s Rohingya (daring), 4 Desember 2016, <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/04/malaysia-pm-urges-world-to-act-against-genocide-of-myanmars-rohingya>, diakses 13 Desember 2016.

[3] Eleanor Albert, ‘The Rohingya Migrant Crisis’, Council on Foreign Relations (daring), 9 Desember 2016, <http://www.cfr.org/burmamyanmar/rohingya-migrant-crisis/p36651>, diakses 13 Desember 2016.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Mieke Molthof, ‘ASEAN and the Principle of Non-Interference’, E-International Relations Students (daring), 8 Februari 2012, <http://www.e-ir.info/2012/02/08/asean-and-the-principle-of-non-interference/>, diakses 18 Desember 2016.

[6] United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (daring), <http://www.unhcr.org/protection/basic/3b66c2aa10/convention-protocol-relating-status-refugees.html>, diakses 18 Desember 2016.

[7] Samuel Osborne, ‘UN getting daily reports of rapes, killings and other abuses against Rohingya Muslims in Burma’, Independent (daring), 18 Desember 2016, <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/burma-rohingya-muslims-rape-murder-accusations-un-aung-san-suu-kyi-a7482516.html>, diakses 19 Desember 2016.

[8] Ibid.

—

This article was written by Ilham Fauzi, research fellow at the Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies (CESASS).