Declaration on Adult Education in ASEAN (Model ASEAN Summit)

 Declaration on Adult Education in ASEAN

WE, the Heads of State/Government of Brunei Darussalam, the Kingdom of Cambodia, the Republic of Indonesia, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, the Union of Myanmar, the Republic of the Philippines, the Republic of Singapore, the Kingdom of Thailand and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), on the occasion of the 2021 Model ASEAN Summit on Adult Education in ASEAN via Video Conference, on 14th July 2021

ACKNOWLEDGING the significance of ASEAN’s role in collaboration to achieve a highly integrated and cohesive economy through developing adult education by providing free education, life skill, vocational skill, welfare, and digital literacy for future skilled labor mobility in the region; 

RECALLING our commitment made in ASEAN Declaration on Human Resources Development for the Changing World of Work was adopted by the 36th ASEAN Summit (2020), Bangkok Declaration on Advancing Partnership in Education for 2030 agenda for sustainable development in ASEAN (2019), Vientiane Declaration On Transition From Informal Employment To Formal Employment Towards Decent Work Promotion in ASEAN (2016), Kuala Lumpur Declaration on Higher Education (2015), Kuala Lumpur Declaration on Higher Education on the Occasion of the 27^th ASEAN Summit (2015); 

DECLARING the ASEAN work plan on education 2016-2020, which aimed to support and implement the ASEAN Post-2015 Vision on Education, and  strengthen, deepen and widen educational cooperation among the ASEAN member states, as well as the ASEAN Dialogue Partners by expanding the scope of education cooperation towards the development of a more coordinated, cohesive and coherent ASEAN position and its contribution to global education issues;

ADOPTING the ASEAN 5-Year Work Plan on Education (2011-2015), which addressed the importance of universal access to basic education of high quality provided by teachers who are well educated and able to teach knowledgeably about the history and heritage of their nation, the need for TVET to be responsive to economic needs, and for higher  education to focus on delivering world class teaching, learning and research and identified four main priority areas and 20 specific programmes for implementation by 2015;

REAFFIRMING that one of the objectives of ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC) is to increase the participation and engagement of women, youth, elderly, persons with disabilities, vulnerable and marginalized groups in the productive workforce by enhancing their entrepreneurial skills, particularly to improve their social well-being and contribute towards national development and regional economic integration with the actions to establish an ASEAN Forum on Youth Entrepreneurship by 2009, implement a women entrepreneurship network by 2010, and build an ASEAN network of experts on entrepreneurship to, among others, conduct skills training for out-of-school youths, the elderly and persons with disabilities by 2010; 

DO HEREBY DECLARE OUR COMMITMENT TO:

1.       Encourage and strengthen regional cooperation and cross-border collaboration of higher education systems in ASEAN by offering more mobilities for adult learners and educators to obtain the new and advanced quality of knowledge and exchange good practical experiences, and establishing university partnerships to promote collaborative study and research programs on the priority areas identified by ASEAN and to develop academic and professional human resources in the region and transmit scientific and scholarly knowledge and information to achieve ASEAN goals;

2.    Promote accessibility and broader participation so that women and men of different social, cultural, economic, educational and other backgrounds are included in adult education and that quality learning opportunities are accessible to all individuals, by developing effective educational responses which address accessibility, autonomy, equity as well as inclusion issues including: 

A.         establishing appropriate strategies to promote adults’ access to and participation in learning activities and to enhance incentives for them to undertake such activities,

B.  tolerating no discrimination on any grounds, including age, gender, ethnicity, migrant status, religion, disability, illness, rurality, sexual identity or orientation, poverty, displacement, imprisonment, occupation or profession,

C.   providing special attention and action to enhance access to quality learning for target disadvantaged groups such as individuals with low levels of, or no, literacy and numeracy and schooling, street children or vulnerable youths in a detention home, the workforce groups (industrial workforce, agriculture, general services, factories, migrant workers and the unemployed), the ethnic or indigenous groups, individuals with disability, prisoners, the elderly, people affected by conflict or disasters, refugees, stateless or displaced persons, and

D.   addressing learners’ needs and aspirations with adult learning approaches that respect and reflect the diversity of learners’ languages and cultures, creating bridges that connect different groups and reinforce unity within communities; 

3.    Implement a federal direct student loan program to subsidize students especially the disadvantaged groups to pursue higher education to meet the labor market needs in ASEAN regions, giving students a better chance at a higher education level as education is the main driver of the social and economic development in all regions, enhancing their competitive capacity with other students at the higher education level, and reducing inequality in education and increasing human capitals in ASEAN regions; 

4.     Emphasize the digital literacy skill as a significant skill in opening ways for employability from regional to a global scale by adopting and promoting digital literacy skills in educational systems starting from upper secondary education to higher education by increasing the accessibility to the internet and technology devices such as Wi-Fi and computers, ensuring that students will have the capacity to understand and use information in multiple formats from a wide range of sources when it is presented via computers and other social media platforms, and guaranteeing an assertiveness of citizens who are capable of living, learning and working in a society where communication and information are shared through digital technology; 

 

5.  Implement harmonization of education systems in ASEAN to ensure comparable/similar education programs and activities providing to students in each country to respond to the skill demands in the region by establishing quality assurance guidelines through system assessment (planning, controlling & follow-up) to improve the education quality in the region, introducing the regional educational framework to provide a curriculum and learning outcomes that are consistent to the labor market, and implementing regional skills competition to support workforce development and to achieve regional standards competency; 

 

6.      Request that university courses and instructions be in line with ASEAN labor market demands, meaning that all member states can enhance their international efficiency by focusing more on soft skills in adult education such as cross-disciplinary outlooks, critical thinking, collective problem-solving, or any necessary and required skills and knowledge that meet the demands of the ASEAN market because these skills are very essential in today’s industry in our region, for they open doors for more employment opportunities to our peoples especially when engaging in cross-border commerce and investment, and also allow a better free flow of skilled labors in ASEAN which is one of the main objectives of the AEC;  

 

7.     Promote an expert mobility program named ‘ASEAN Professional Initiative’ for transferring ASEAN experts in the field of agriculture, technology, mechanics, masonry, carpentry, brewing, and cooking for 3 months, and the program is coordinated by ASEAN with the collaboration from the Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training of all ASEAN member states — this program is on a voluntary basis which means that the requested country can request ASEAN to coordinate experts in a specific skill from other ASEAN countries, and the requested country is responsible for funds, safety, accommodation and visa for experts

 

8.    Encourage ASEAN member states to consider strengthening and improving mutual cooperative assistance by helping each other’s capacity in adult education, and sharing their experiences which require ASEAN member states to promote the regular exchange of information, documentation and resources on policies, concepts and practices, as well as relevant research, among adult learning and professional education at the national, regional and international levels; and

 

9.       Provide special care and training not only to individuals who use technology devices to support their everyday lives and jobs but also to those who do not receive the same treatment and care, those who are still seeking help to access basic education facilities, and those who will most likely be denied access to education, technology skills, labor skills and professional skills.

Done via video conference, this fourteenth Day of July in the year Two Thousand and Twenty One.

Done by students from class M3.4 (2020-2021), DOE, IFL, RUPP

Global Studies 302: Introduction to ASEAN

Virtual Class, MS Team

Disclaimer: This declaration is written by student delegates solely for simulation and academic purposes. These views herein do not in any way represent the view of any Cambodian university and ministry and government or any other institutions in ASEAN. 

***This article is published here for the purpose of sharing the format/sample. We are aware that there are many rooms to improve for this paper.

Declaration on Internationalization in Higher Education In ASEAN (Model ASEAN Summit)

DECLARATION ON INTERNATIONALIZATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN ASEAN

WE, the Heads of State/Government of Brunei Darussalam, the Kingdom of Cambodia, the Republic of Indonesia, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, the Union of Myanmar, the Republic of the Philippines, the Republic of Singapore, the Kingdom of Thailand and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), on the occasion of the 2021 Model ASEAN Summit in Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei, on 13th July 2021;

RECALLING the Bandar Seri Begawan Declaration on Youth Entrepreneurship and Employment, adopted at Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei Darussalam on 22nd May 2013;

TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION the four priority areas and 20 specific programmes for implementation under the ASEAN Five Year Work Plan on Education 2011- 2015;

TAKING INTO ACCOUNT the Eight Key Elements on Education Adopted at the 8th ASEAN Education Ministers Meeting (ASED) in Lao PDR, September 2014;

COMMENDING the on-going efforts in developing the ASEAN 5-Year Work Plan on Education 2016-2020;

REAFFIRMING the Cha-Am Hua Hin Declaration on Strengthening Cooperation on Education to Achieve an ASEAN Caring and Sharing Community, adopted at Cha-Am Hua Hin, Thailand on 24th October 2009;

DO HEREBY DECLARE OUR COMMITMENT TO:

1. Encourage and strengthen partnerships among universities of ASEAN countries, by providing a variety of scholarships to young talented applicants, introducing cultural field trips and expeditions to education programs to further unify cultural diversity among ASEAN nations; 

2. Implement an ASEAN academic franchise to eliminate the difficulty of credit score, by exchanging procedures for eligible applicants, providing domestic-based learning environment to local students, considering franchise only the specialized major or selected major that contribute the most to our country, and authorizing our local lecturers to be trained at franchisor institutions; 

3. Enhance the abilities and qualities of teaching by revising study programs for students to gain intercultural competencies, incorporating more up-to-date equipment to provide better quality in training to specific education courses, and providing training sessions to domestic educators to maximize overseas teaching efficiency while reducing costs; 

4. Monitor the effectiveness of ASEAN curriculums, by introducing necessary changes in order to provide students with up-to-date learning experiences, analyzing the current curricular education to ensure the quality of its courses, and incorporating transferable credits to other universities in ASEAN member states; 

5. Support the significant role of academic and administrative staff in further development, by operating the exchange programs, exchanging the experience and the effectiveness to obtain the knowledge or skills to improve the advanced education from other well-established universities in ASEAN, improving and fostering various skills for student personal development and increasing academic opportunities; 

6. Improve students’ study performance and readiness for academic changes, by providing new knowledge for both national and international universities, strengthening research studies and knowledge production for students, observing students’ learning outcomes, creating more opportunities for academic pursuit, including secondary languages into curriculums, and implementing models of digital and blended learning in the classroom; 

7. Accept and display uncommonly planned administration for international applicants, by offering many types of assistance and services that covers immigration procedure and house funding to reduce costs and expenses for oversea students, recruiting and training faculty staffs to understand the diverse cultures of ASEAN countries, joining forces with local area offices and family volunteers that offer moral supports to exchange students, providing pre-class support to better prepare students for their oversea movements, and creating working programs that provide students with the opportunity to earn extra profits; 

8. Exchange information regarding the effectiveness of ASEAN countries' curriculum to establish stronger partnership and promote educational changes, by promoting cultural exchange between students to strengthen ASEAN identity, and providing both students and educators with the opportunity to travel overseas;

9. Provide incentives to encourage students to further pursue higher education, by providing more direct admission places for socio-economically disadvantaged students, facilitating greater access to education for both students and educators, and considering the importance of academic credits transfer procedure for students when they return to their home countries; 

10. Enhance the mobility of ASEAN learners in order to improve and boost the awareness of the importance of higher education in ASEAN, by improving the quality of higher education programs within the region to global standards, and offering overseas training courses to domestic and foreign educators. 

Done in Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei, this Thirteenth Day of July in the year Two Thousand and Twenty One.

Done by students from class M3.5 (2020-2021), DOE, IFL, RUPP

Global Studies 302: Introduction to ASEAN

Virtual Class, MS Team

Disclaimer: This declaration is written by student delegates solely for simulation and academic purposes. These views herein do not in any way represent the view of any Cambodian university and ministry and government or any other institutions in ASEAN. 

***This article is published here for the purpose of sharing the format/sample. We are aware that there are many rooms to improve for this paper.

Rakhine State Action Plan: Why It Failed to End the Rohingya Issues in Myanmar

Abstract

Myanmar government’s denial of granting Rohingyas citizenship and from allowing them to enjoy full rights as other ethnics in the country has led to many issues between the Rohingya ethnic and Myanmar government and as well as among other ethnics in the Rakhine state. The clashes between two sides have resulted in vast destructions of Rohingya villages along with the death of Rohingya people, military personnel and innocent people and mass migrations of Rohingya people to neighboring countries, especially to Bangladesh. Myanmar governments have responded by taking different actions in order to solve this conflict. Remarkably, “Rakhine State Action Plan” was drafted by Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) government. However, the Rakhine State Action Plan has proven “problematic” and ineffective: problematic because it consisted of “highly problematic” elements and ineffective because the Rohingya issues have been still protracting. This paper investigated why and how this action plan failed to end the issues of Rohingya. The findings aimed to provide insightful ways to understand the causes of the failure of the policy as they would serve as assets of knowledge for academics and policy-makers. The study was conducted in qualitative approach given the intractability of the issue, so as to understand the underlying causes and perspectives of the Myanmar students on the ineffectiveness of the Action Plan. Content analysis and survey were deployed in this study. As found, the Rakhine State Action Plan did not respond to the demands of Rohingyas. The Action Plan itself consisted of problematic elements such as the policy of resettlement that set out the relocation and encampment of the internally displaced Rohingya people to unspecified rural sites in the state with no prospect of returning to their homes and the citizenship verification that required the Rohingya ethnic to register as Bangalis. However, Rohingyas wanted to gain full citizenship as Rohingya ethnic and the ethnicity to be accepted nationwide and to have their rights as other citizens. 

Chapter I: Introduction

1.                  Background

An ethnic group, who identify themselves as Rohingya is a Muslim minority in Myanmar. Historically, Myanmar and Bangladesh were colonized by Britain. During the colonization, Britain implemented a policy to encourage the movement of migrant workers in order to increase the labor needs for rice, cultivation and profits (Abdelkader, 2017). After decolonization, the Myanmar government’s denial of granting Rohingyas citizenship and from allowing them to enjoy full rights as other ethnics have led to many issues between the Rohingya ethnic and Myanmar government and as well as among other ethnics in the Rakhine state.

There have been a number of attacks in Rakhine state that involve Myanmar military and Rohingya insurgents. The clashes between two sides have resulted in vast destructions of Rohingya villages along with the death of Rohingya people and military personnel. Consequently, thousands of them have fled to Bangladesh to escape from the crackdowns. Following these events, there were restrictions on humanitarian aids and the failure of returning displaced people back home.

The government have responded by taking actions in order to solve this conflict. “Rakhine State Action Plan” was drafted by USDP government. However, the Rakhine State Action Plan has proven “problematic” and ineffective: problematic because it consisted of “highly problematic” elements (Asia Report 2014), and ineffective because the Rohingya issue is still protracting. 

2.                Research Question

Why did the Rakhine State Action Plan fail to end the Rohingya issues in Myanmar?

2.1   Sub Research Question

1.      What are included in the Action Plan and why is it problematic?

2.      What are the flaws of the Rakhine State Action Plan that hinder the success of the policy?

3.      What should be amended or further included with the existing Action Plan to bring the conflict to an end?

3.             Significance of Study

The study will contribute to the existing knowledge about Rohingya issues and actions by Myanmar government. It help students, researchers, and the public to understand the events, responses, and government failure to end the conflict. Hence, the study aims to provide insightful ways of seeing the policy of Myanmar government in dealing with the ethnic issues. Moreover, policy recommendations will serve as assets of knowledge for academics and policy-makers.

4.           Research Methodology

4.1 Study design

The research was conducted in qualitative approach given the intractability of the issue, so as to understand the underlying causes and perspectives of the Myanmar students on the ineffectiveness of the Action Plan. Content analysis and survey method were used in this study.

4.2 Data Type and Data Collection

On the account of content analysis, secondary data was used predominantly. Existing literatures including published articles, news, journals, official documents, and reports from credible and reliable sources on the internet were derived from specific sources from both national archives and international institutions and digital libraries such as Irrawaddy news, Rakhine News Agency, Asia report, Human Rights Watch, United Nations, International Crisis Group, Jstor and other research institutions. Therefore, document and internet research were abundantly used as secondary data collection method. In regards to the survey, primary data was drawn from 14 participants, all of whom are Myanmar undergraduate students majoring in social science. In respect to the survey, it was designed to explore the perspectives of the respondents on Rohingya issues the Rakhine State Action Plan and recommendations for government policy.

5.                 Scope and Limitation

This study is limited to the investigation on the Rakhine State Action Plan with the timeframe scoped to the period of USDP administration between 2011 and 2016. This investigation focuses only on two aspects of the Rakhine State Action Plan: Permanent Settlement and Citizenship Assessment. However, given time constraint, only 20 online surveys were sent out. 14 of the 20 population submitted the survey. Although the 14 participants could not represent all Myanmar, their contribution gave this study insightful understanding of Myanmar people think about the given issues.

Chapter II: Literature Review

Since the Rohingya crisis involve human rights violation, many scholars have conducted many studies in regards to the issue. Most of the existing studies provide insightful understanding about the root causes of the conflict and the motives of the government’s citizenship law.

One study precisely explains the roots of the conflict based on the term Rohingya that is subjectively unrecognized by government of the state. This is seen as the wrongdoing of the government who politicizes the issue and mistreats the population of Rohingya. The Amnesty International 2017 report stressed about the segregation issue and suggested the policy recommendation that the international actors shall condemn the act of the government publicly, and provide aid and education to the people in the Rakhine State. (Caged Without A Roof: Apartheid in Myanmar's Rakhine State, 2017). 

David Dapice (2017) from Harvard University has produced a study report about the Rakhine State crisis. His brought two Myanmar focused groups to Indonesia in order to understand about military matter in the similar issue in 2015 and another group to Ache to study about how the bloody ethnic conflict was ended. Later, the focused groups provided several peace resolutions; granting citizenship, residency and mobility in Rakhine, restricting foreign illegal fishing in the coast of Rakhine to help Rakhine fishermen, and finding more foreign aid and extend the health care and education in Rakhine. Dapice also suggested there shall be a new citizenship policy that includes Rohingya in and the representative of Muslims in Rakhine who can speak for their interest with the government. 

Regarding to the 2012 Rakhine State Action Plan, it was believed as the government policy created in response to the domestic and international pressure over the human right abuse act and the discriminatory citizenship policy of the government. President Thein Sien pushed the plan due to three main objectives; maintaining peace and stability in Rakhine State, lessening the concern of the Buddhist nationalist in Rakhine, and responding to the concern of the international donors. Besides, this was a show about the leadership willingness of the government during the ASEAN Regional Forum in Myanmar which secretary of state John Kerry presented as well. 

 

Chapter III: Myanmar Students’ Perspectives on Rohingya Issues

Many Rakhine people share a perspective that “Rakhine State is only for the Rakhine people”.  The Rakhine see Rohingya as Muslim Bengalis as migrants from Bangladesh eyeing for economic opportunities and works in agricultural sector in Myanmar. Moreover, Rakhine worry that Rohingyas control their land and economy, demanding for a separate state (Rakhine Inquiry Commission, 2013). This led to strong inter-communal sentiment against Rohingya. In this section, three aspects of focuses from Myanmar students are elaborated. 

1.                   Perspectives on Rohingya Issues

All of the respondents share similar perceptions toward Rohingya people or Bengali. They believe that Rohingya issues are the issues of ethnic identity, territory, culture, religion, illegal immigration and terrorism. Based on the result of the survey, majority of the respondents shares belief that citizenship official status of ethnic identity, recognition as an ethnic group of Myanmar, Myanmar nationality and civil rights are among what Rohingya people want from Myanmar government. One respondent states that stopping the violation of human rights is what Rohingya want. Moreover, the respondents also shared similar tone on the demand for the territory by the Rohingyas. 

2.                Perspectives on Actions under USDP Government

When asked about actions taken by Myanmar government under USDP administration, not all respondents answered. Granting white card - temporary Resident Card, permitting NGOs to work on the issues, and putting military control over the region are among actions what the respondents saw during USDP government. There are different views among the respondent toward the practical solution to end the conflict by allowing NGOs to work and giving white card to Rohingya people. Others state that separation and recognition of Rohingya people are also not practical in solving this problem.

3.             Perspectives on Government Policy

Therefore, they suggest a number of recommendations to be implemented. Most of the respondents suggest two most important actors to solve the problem: government and international community. Some mention about citizenship granting should be a solution. This is not the only action to be taken however; others following steps are also considered by many of the respondents. These include the stop of using force from both sides, establishment related commissions, provision of fundamental rights to Rohingya people, reconciliation efforts and state security. Moreover, it is also suggested that government and international community should work hand in hand with each other, while at the same time international community should study and understand more about the situations by not just listening to a particular side, especially media. 

Chapter IV: Rakhine State Action Plan

 1.                What Rohingyas Demand

Historically, Rohingya demanded to establish self-administrative area under their control in the northern part of the Rakhine state (Rakhine Inquiry Commission, 2013). After the World War II, Muslim mujahidin rebellion fought for the right of the population to live as full citizens in an autonomous Muslim area in the north of the Rakhine state. The main objectives of Rohingyas leaders was to gain their rights including full citizenship and a legitimate ethnic group of Myanmar. They promoted Rohingya identity to be one of the ethnic group of Myanmar so that they can get full citizenship by birth (International Crisis Group, 2014). For the militants or extremists, they aim to create Muslim autonomous area in the northern Rakhine. Furthermore, they demand human rights, civil rights, repatriation, resettlement, reconstruction and economic restructuring.

The refugee Rohingyas want to return home safely with dignity, freely decide their political status and to pursue economic, social and cultural development without any restriction (Birsel, 2017). They desire for basic rights such as right to participate in the political process, right to education, right to do business freely, freedom of movement and freedom of expression. Therefore, as stateless Rohingyas, being recognized as citizens of a country to enjoy human rights and civil rights in the long term is fundamental for them. 

2.                   Rakhine State Action Plan and Its Problematic Elements

In light of the violent outbreak in 2012, the Rakhine action plan was established under President Thein Sien. Followed by the April 2013 recommendations of Rakhine Investigative Commission, the Rakhine Action Plan was designed to eradicate the problem with 6 core elements including Security, Stability, and Rules of Law; Rehabilitation and Reconstruction; Permanent resettlement; Citizenship assessment of Bengalis; Socio-economic development; and Peaceful coexistence. Respectively, in regards to Security, Stability and Rule of Law, law enforcement was placed under the spotlight to ensure the safety and security of Myanmar. It prevented illegal aliens from entering the country and practice the Myanmar constitution, Refugee law, Humanitarian principle and International Human Right Law in order to monitor civil society organizations. Second, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction emphasized on resettling and providing shelter and basic needs for displaced persons in Myanmar. Furthermore, it added on improving telecommunications facilities for displaced persons as well as coordinating and cooperating with non-profit organizations. Third, the Permanent settlement was being described on conducting the plan and assessment for displaced communities, building road, providing socio-economic support to resettled communities, and providing livelihood equipment for displaced people. Fourth, it emphasized on the Citizenship assessment of Bengalis and the process of how to get that citizenship. It required Rohingyas to register as Bengalis in Rakhine State, and set norm and criteria for citizenship assessment. It further included the addressing of illegal aliens and taking actions against illegal immigration in both present time and future time. Fifth, for the Socio-economic developmental plan, the government planned to improve farm productivity and manage fishery stock and other resources in sustainable ways. Moreover, the government also claimed to develop tourism sector and preserve the environment and culture in Rakhine state. In addition, the government believed that the action plan can expand and promote livelihood actions such as improve education system, health care system, electricity, promote trade and investment, and advance telecommunications and IT network, and also prevent natural disasters. Lastly, regarding Peaceful coexistence, the government would ensure all religious schools and qualification of teachers to meet the standard and rules in Rakhine state. Moreover, it further established the system that would promote peace throughout Myanmar and prevents or reduces sectarian conflict (Rakhine State Action Plan, 2014).

Introduced in 2013, the Rakhine Action Plan was to serve as a blueprint for development and reconstruction after the conflict. However, this particular policy failed to see any light of success given the protracted nature of the conflict and the underlying intention of the government in the Action Plan that worsen the situation. Aforementioned, the failure of the policy has a lot to do with the Action plan itself. Each elements of the Action plan entrenched discriminatory policies and violation of basic rights, both of which turned development and reconstruction to segregation and statelessness (Bookbinder, 2014). One instance is the third section of the plan on “Permanent Resettlement” that set out the relocation and encampment of the internally displaced Rohingya people to unspecified rural sites in the state with no prospect of returning to their homes. This policy constitutes a violation of freedom of movement and other basic rights, in a sense that putting the Rohingyas in permanent resettlement zones in isolated rural camps would further isolate and marginalize the Rohingya and tighten their access to basic needs, thus making more dependent on foreign assistance (Human Right Watch, 2014). Another major problem embeds in the fourth section of the plan on citizenship assessment that built on the discriminatory 1982 Citizenship law, which required the Rohingya to be registered as “Bengalis”, a term heavily rejected by the Rohingyas (Ferrie, 2014). As much as nationalism was used as an important political tool to foster self-determination and keep nation-state cohesive, ethnicism also functioned in similar fashion.  Hence, it was unlikely that the Rohingyas would renounce their claim to Rohingya identity. Consequently, in the action plan, the government stipulated the lawful enforcement for the Rohingyas who refused to give up their ethnic identity or those that were deemed ineligible for citizenship, therefore punishing them under Myanmar laws and procedures such as indefinite detention and deportation (Bookbinder, 2014). In a nutshell, the Rakhine action plan which was drafted in secrecy portrays the actual intention of the government to drive Rohingya population stateless and segregation.   

  

Chapter V: Discussion and Policy Recommendation

The Rakhine Action Plan did not respond to the demands of Rohingyas. The Action Plan itself consisted of problematic elements such as the policy of resettlement of displace Rongyas, the citizenship verification that required Rohingya ethnic to register as Bangalis. As mentioned above, Rohingyas wanted to gain full citizenship as Rohingya ethnic and the ethnicity to be accepted nationwide and to have their rights as other citizens. As found, the reason why the Action Plan failed to address the Rohingya issues was because of its elements contain controversies – resettlement and citizenship verification –  that did not respond to the demands of Rohingya people and therefore it was not favored by them.

Having analyzed the elements of the Rakhine State Action Plan and with the voices of Myanmar people, this section is to propose the following recommendations.

To solve the citizenship issue, with existing policy on the citizen verification, the verification process should be put to further work in order to include the complaint procedure so that the government can hear the concerns of the Rohingya. The verification should distinguish between who deserves citizenship status and who is an economic migrant. In addition, the Rohingya should be given full rights and freedoms regardless of their religion, ethnicity, or citizenship status. The government should review or amend its citizenship law by taking the interests of the Rohingya into consideration while at the same time strengthening law on border control to prevent illegal migrants and extremist groups from entering the country. This will help ensure the security of the local people. Dealing with the rehabilitation and reconstruction issues, the government should create security force to ensure the safety of the returnees from the refugee camp to the place prepared by the government and facilitate the return process. Concerning the issue of violation of rule of law by restriction of movement in the closed camps, the government should conduct independent and impartial investigation and bring the one who violated the law to be held accountable for their action. Regarding the restriction to the socio-economic development, the government should take into account and give priority to the needs of all local communities in Rakhine. Tackling the issue of the unequal economic opportunities and prosperity between the Rakhine and the Rohingya, the government should encourage the companies operating or investing in Rakhine, by giving some incentives such as reducing taxes, to hire more people from Rakhine people. The international community should take more actions by cooperating with the government and providing more aid instead of condemning.

Chapter VI: Conclusion  

In response to the ethnic marginalization and abuse that has been going on for decades, the USDP government initiated an action plan to address the issue. However, it failed to produce any fruitful result. Instead, it took a turn for the worse. To a great extent, the Rakhine action plan, which was drafted in secrecy, was the main problem itself; in a sense that it composed of elements designed to drive the Rohingya people stateless. Therefore, how can the problems be solved when the problem-solving mechanism is the problem. 

 
References:

Abdelkader, E. (2017, October). The conversation. Retrieved from Theconversation.com: https://theconversation.com/the-history-of-the-persecution-of-myanmars-rohingya-84040

Albert, E. (2017, December 7). Council of Foreign Relations . Retrieved from cfr: https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/rohingya-crisis

Birsel.R. (2017, October 7). Rohingya insurgents open to peace but Myanmar ceasefire ending. Retrieved from Reuters World News: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-myanmar-rohingya/rohingya-insurgents-open-to-peace-but-myanmar-ceasefire-ending-idUSKBN1CC05C

Bookbinder, A. (2014, October 3). Rakhine Action Plan a ‘blueprint for segregation and statelessness’. Retrieved from DVB: http://www.dvb.no/news/rakhine-action-plan-a-blueprint-for-segregation-and-statelessness-burma-myanmar/44705

Burma: Government Plan Would Segregate Rohingya, Force Resettlement, Discriminatory Citizenship Creates Dangers. (2014, October 3).  Retrieved from: https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/10/03/burma-government-plan-would-segregate-rohingya

Caged Without A Roof: Apartheid in Myanmar's Rakhine State. (2017). Retrieved from Amnesty International: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/11/myanmar-apartheid-in-rakhine-state/

Rakhine State Action Plan. (2014, October 27). Retrieved from: http://www.maungzarni.net/2014/10/rakhine-action-plan.html?m=1.

Dapice, D. (2017, May). Rakhine State: Dangers and Opportunities. Retrieved from Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation: https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/myanmar-politics-rakhine-state

European Commission. (2017). The Rohingya crisis. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/rohingya_en.pdf

Ferrie, J. (2014, October 3). Rights groups condemn Myanmar's Rohingya plan. Retrieved from 
Reuters: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-myanmar-rohingya/rights-groups-condemn-myanmars-rohingya-plan-idUKKCN0HS0BT20141003

FIDH and ALTSEAN-Burma. (2016, October 26). Still oppressed: Rohingya policies and restrictions under Myanmar's new government. Retrieved from: https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/20161025_myanmar_rohingya_br_en-4.pdf.

Gamez, K. R. (2017). EXAMINING THE ASEAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS (AICHR): THE CASE STUDY OF THE ROHINGYA CRISIS. Tilburg University, International and European Law.

International Crisis Group. (2014, October 22). Myanmar: The Politics of Rakhine State. Asia Report N°261 Retrieved from: https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/myanmar-politics-rakhine-state

Mathieson, D. S. (2016, January 6). The Electoral Aftermath in Rakhine State. Retrieved from: https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/06/electoral-aftermath-rakhine-state-0.

Open Security (2017). The Rohingya crisis of June 2012: a survivor's testimony. Retrieved from: https://www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity/hamid-emma-crichton/rohingya-crisis-of-june-2012-survivors-testimony

Rakhine Inquiry Commission. (2013, July 8). Final Report of Inquiry Commission on Sectarian Violence in Rakhine State. Retrieved from: http://www.burmalibrary.org/docs15/Rakhine_Commission_Report-en-red.pdf

Refugees International. (2017, July 11). A Continuing Humanitarian Tragedy: Ongoing Abuses and Oppression against the Rohingya in Myanmar. Retrieved from: https://reliefweb.int/report/myanmar/continuing-humanitarian-tragedy-ongoing-abuses-and-oppression-against-rohingya

Rieffel, L. (2017, September 13). No simple solution to the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2017/09/13/no-simple-solution-to-the-rohingya-crisis-in-myanmar/.




 
APPENDIX

Consent Form

We are a group of students studying at Department of International Studies at Royal University of Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Currently we are conducting a research on the topic “Valuating of Rakhine State Action Plan”. Specifically we are trying to explore the berries that prevented the Action Plan from solving Rohingya ethnic issue. With this occasion, we are investigating on two levels: the elements of the Action Plan and actual issues to be addressed.  

As latter focuses on the actual issues, it is necessary to hear the local voices. Therefore, we are requesting you to be our voluntary participants for our investigation. Our findings will serve as beneficial knowledge regarding the ethnic conflict and policies dealing with such issue. It is also important for policy-makers to understand better about the issue. 

It is important to note that your identity will be most CONFIDENTIAL and will not be revealed at any cost without your consensus. 

By selecting “NEXT”, you voluntarily agree to be our participant without any internal or external force, and you also agree to provide us with correct answer based on your point of view.
Should you have any inquiries, feel free to contact us. We can be reached via uk.dararath@gmail.com. 



Questionnaire: Valuating of Rakhine State Action Plan

I. Brief Background
₋ Age:
₋ Year of school:
₋ University name:
₋ Email (optional; if you give, we will send our research as soft copy once it is done):

II. Rohingya Issues: We are asking your thoughts. So you do not have to search internet to fill it; just say what you know. You can write in either English or Burmese language.

- Can you briefly talk about the causes of Rohinya issue?
- Based on your opinion, please kindly tell us about what Rohinya people want from Myanmar government?

III. Actions under USDP Government: Just say what you know. You can write in either English or Burmese language.

- Under USDP regime, what did you see from USDP government do to solve the Rohingya issue? Please list down all actions by USDP government that you know (Just say what you know)

Authors:
Uk Dararath
Choun Sotheavuth
Hour Sopheana
Lam Kimchheng
Lim Chhay Heng
Su Myat Wai Hlaing
Sinn Van Dara

Myanmar-China Relations: Political Change during Democratic Transition

Myanmar-China Relations: Political Change during Democratic Transition

Myanmar democratic transition is not an overnight process. The seven-step roadmap for the transition was drafted two previous government before USDP government under Thein Sein. With the seven-step roadmap, new constitution was adopted. Under Thein Sein government or the USDP, the seventh step which was “building a modern, developed and democratic nation by the state leaders elected by the Hluttaw, and the government and other central organs former by the Hluttaw” (Mizzima Election 2010, cited in Sun 2012) . Major changes were witnessed, and its foreign policy was an obvious evidence of the democratic transition. Myoe (2016) states the objectives of Myanmar's foreign policy under USDP government which involved a form of multilateralism, especially regional cooperation and rebalance of relationship among major powers. These all focuses of Myanmar foreign policy were motivated by various interests including domestic pressure, economic benefits, security cooperation and strategic balancing. In the other words, Myanmar foreign policy shifted from isolationism and China over-dependency to regionalism and rapprochement with various major powers. 

Domestic political transition appeared to be a driving force for such foreign policy to be conducted. First it is very important to understand the nature of politics under the USDP government. The USDP government sought for legitimacy. The USDP government needed not only domestic legitimacy but also international one. As constitutionally elected, the USDP viewed international legitimacy beneficial to Myanmar image and its economic improvement (Myoe, 2016). By reforming its political atmosphere where democratization was taking place, it opened to international investments, especially by the West. Crisis Group Asia Report (2012) states that political opening brought about economic gains including lifting of sanctions by EU, US, Australia and Japan. The flows of trades and investment would allow the USDP to gain more support from domestic to its leadership and to strengthening democratization process.

Second, prioritized areas of focuses under the USDP included fighting poverty, easing political control over civil society, political activists and political organizations and media, reforming program on rural and urban, quick win strategy  such as framework for economic and social reforms (Robinson, 2014). Such areas of development could be achieved when there was with supports of international community and foreign investments. For instance, policy of fighting poverty required foreign investments for job creation. The framework of industrial development and rural development initiatives is another example where ending its isolation and integrating its economics with global system were necessary. 

Third, the USDP was concerned over national security. Having been over-dependent on China for decades, it was dangerous for Myanmar security as it was viewed China might interfere  if keeping such heavy rely and the USDP was also aware that there was a growth of anti-China inside Myanmar (Myoe, 2016). Chinese exploitation and the over-dependency put Myanmar in a position where changing its foreign policy direction was urgent. Moreover, reducing its dependency on China while improving its relationships with others states such as the U.S., Japan, Russia and India were a Myanmar strategic rationality for national security. Not only getting rid of China could Myanmar guarantee its national security but  also benefit from maintaining good relations from these powers. For instance, having normalized relations with the U.S., Myanmar could have the U.S sanction lifted. Myanmar, moreover, has established its good relations with Russia and India in term of military cooperation while with Japan in term of “government’s peace process and efforts towards democratization”. Myoe (2016) argues that “A new foreign policy objective does not conflict with nor replace the existing ones, but supplements them to make Myanmar foreign relations more active, dynamic, and international.” 

The foreign policy of Myanmar that aimed “to enhance national security,” “to bolster economic prosperity,” and “to promote a peaceful and equitable world order” (Myoe, 2016) were motivated by political transition under the USDP government. At least three reasons of USDP to conduct such foreign policy. First, the USDP wanted legitimacy that it was a source of foreign investment; second, there were needs of foreign investment to achieve its policy to fight poverty and social development; and finally, the rebalance of relationship among powerful states was necessary to get rid of China over-dependency, to maintain Myanmar security and to benefit various aspects, including economy and democratization from, by maintaining good relations with other actors. 

References

Myoe, M. A. (2016). Myanmar’s Foreign Policy under the USDP Government: Continuities and Changes. http://nbn-resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-4-9350 

SUN, Y. (2012). China and the Changing Myanmar, in: Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 

Crisis Group Asia Report. (2012). Myanmar: The Politics of Economic Reform. https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/myanmar-politics-economic-reform 

Wiiliams, M. C. (2015). Myanmar’s Troubled Path to Reform: Political Prospects in a Landmark Election Year. https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/field/field_document/20150226Myanmar.pdf 

Robinson, G. (2014). Myanmar’s Transition: Economics or Politics? Which Came First and Why It Matters. http://www.relooney.com/NS4053/00_NS4053_156.pdf 

Cambodia between China and the United States

“Cambodia between China and the United States”

The thesis on “Cambodia between China and the United States” hypothesizes the motive which Cambodia is more supportive to China than the U.S. This motive is based on two main facets: first, the Uighurs incident and the ASEAN’s failure to issue the joint communique; and second, Hun Sen’s expressions toward China and the U.S. Therefore, the thesis aims to explore the factors that push Cambodia to be closer to China than to the U.S.

The author employs case-study and retrospective approaches to insightfully discover the motivations pushing a closer Cambodia’s foreign policy toward China rather than toward the U.S. To answer this, several determinants are studied. The assessment is categorized into two, which are the individual level of analysis and state level of analysis. The individual level includes the prime minister’s reactions towards China and the U.S and his personality, background and perception toward each of the countries. At the state level, state-internal factors are taken into consideration. These include substate-actors, contexts and Cambodia’s relations with China and US. The author studies the bureaucratic system in making foreign policy and the lobby groups. More importantly, the contexts of the given period are also discovered to solve the research problem. Last but not least, at this same level of analysis, extends of interactions of Cambodia’s relations with China and the U.S., economic and political linkages, are also investigated. 

These approaches show their significances for this case exceptionally. The author mentions that previous studies focus mainly on the economic aspect to study the relations of Cambodia between China and the U.S. This study particularly looks up to different aspects as mentioned above since those factors contribute greatly to the path of Cambodia’s foreign policy. While Cambodian prime minister personally and/or politically plays an essential part for shaping the policy, the bureaucratic processes and actual situational contexts of Cambodia to China and to the U.S, in addition to the economic relations, also take part in Cambodia’s foreign policy contribution.

As found, Prime Minister Hun Sen’s personality is defined as “irascibly intractable and active-aggressive manner” which he doesn’t want to stay under someone’s control yet actively works and is willing to stay in power for long time. That is why Hun Sen moves closer to China than to the U.S. since the U.S tends to advise and control or influence Cambodian politics. The political natures of China and the U.S also shape Cambodia’s foreign policy. For instance, China recognized Hun Sen’s government after the 1997 incident and gave aids to Cambodia while the U.S toughly reacted. To gain his government legitimacy, Hun Sen has chosen China over the U.S. Besides, bureaucracy in which Hour Namhong plays an utmost role also contributes so much to foreign policy direction since Hour Namhong tends to accept, and be accepted by, China more while holding antipathy, historically, to the U.S. The Elites who also work closely with Hun Sen can influent Cambodia’s foreign policy, given that those tycoons have tight relations with China, economically. More Chinese companies and more interactions in a form of state exchange visits between Cambodia and China also motivate Cambodia to stay closer with China than with the U.S. 

Reference: 

Oudom, T. (2014). Cambodia between China and the United States. http://www.academia.edu/10739334/Cambodia_between_China_and_the_United_States