As Bangladesh Army Chief, BNP Resist 'Rohingya Corridor', Yunus Silent But Flags Fund Cuts
Last Updated:
Sources in Bangladesh suggest the Rakhine Corridor idea has not been completely abandoned, and discussions concerning the Rohingya crisis continue
Amid strong opposition from political parties, including the BNP, and the military top brass, Bangladesh's interim government, led by chief adviser Muhammad Yunus, has fallen silent on the proposed Rakhine Corridor talks. However, sources in Bangladesh suggest the idea has not been completely abandoned, and discussions concerning the Rohingya crisis continue.
The army chief, during a private meeting with senior commanders, reportedly expressed serious reservations about the project's strategic and security implications. Political parties, including senior figures of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, also rejected the idea, citing national security concerns.
'Silent treatment'?
However, the Yunus administration appears to be quietly pursuing the plan, seeking international support through global platforms, emphasising humanitarian grounds. A source familiar with the developments stated that a humanitarian passage, not a corridor, is now the subject of consensus among multiple stakeholders, including Myanmar, Bangladesh, and other involved parties.
The proposed passage, intended to facilitate aid delivery between Rohingya settlements and camps in Cox's Bazar and designated zones along the Bangladesh-Myanmar border, has faced sharp domestic criticism. Security analysts and several political parties, including senior BNP leaders, have warned that such a passage could create a semi-autonomous zone and further destabilise the region.
A senior BNP leader, speaking to News18 from Dhaka, said, 'We cannot allow the Rakhine Corridor cutting across Bangladesh. We want a stable and peaceful country. We have presented our views to the interim government in this regard, and we will oppose any such decision that may put Bangladesh's security and stability at stake."
Addressing the media in Dhaka last week, national security adviser Khalilur Rahman said, 'The UN only asked if Bangladesh could assist in sending humanitarian aid near the border, to be delivered to the Rakhine state by UN partners. We said we can consider," as reported by The Daily Star, a widely circulated Bangladeshi newspaper.
A meeting between chief adviser Yunus and UN resident coordinator Gwyn Lewis this week has fuelled further speculation. According to an official statement from the Bangladesh government, the discussion focused significantly on the Rohingya crisis and future cooperation frameworks, with Yunus appealing for international cooperation and funds.
'In their meeting, the resident coordinator and the chief adviser addressed the pressing issues surrounding the Rohingya crisis and the ongoing financing challenges," the statement said. They expressed serious concern about significant funding reductions, which are severely impacting essential programmes within the camps.
Yunus stated the 'urgent need for sustained solidarity and increased support from the international community to mitigate the funding cuts and reinforce Bangladesh's efforts to aid the vulnerable Rohingya population".
While the Yunus administration has avoided public discussion of the proposed corridor following strong opposition, diplomatic sources suggest the concept of a passage has not been dismissed. For now, the Rakhine corridor remains an undeclared and inactive element of Bangladesh's evolving foreign and domestic policy.
First Published:
June 07, 2025, 07:30 IST
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
16 minutes ago
- Indian Express
How latest drive to deport illegal Bangladeshi immigrants stands out
Since Operation Sindoor was launched on May 7, Indian authorities have 'pushed back' more than 2,500 allegedly illegal Bangladeshi immigrants across the international border, What distinguishes this drive is the urgency and scale: the government has not only issued a 30-day deadline for verification of illegal immigrants, but identified individuals are now being transported in Indian Air Force aircraft from various states to border outposts. This has, however, raised concerns around due process, humanitarian issues, and pending litigation, especially reports of people being left in the no man's land between India and Bangladesh. Migration between what is now Bangladesh and India dates back to British times. * The colonial administration encouraged settlement in the then sparsely populated Assam by bringing in labourers from Bengal and North India. * Post-Partition, millions of refugees from East Pakistan, mostly Hindus, moved to India. Amid the brutal Pakistani crackdown on Bengalis, some 10 million people, mostly Hindus, sought refuge in India in 1971 alone. * Over the decades, economic migration from Bangladesh to India has continued, with many crossing the border into states like Assam and West Bengal in search of jobs. This influx has led to significant socio-political tension, particularly in Assam. While the India-Bangladesh border is largely fenced today, gaps remain, and illegal migration persists, with Bangladeshi workers visible in metropolitan labour markets across India. There is presently no official or universally accepted figure about the number of illegal Bangladeshi immigrants in India, and estimates have varied widely. In 2004, then MoS (Home) Sriprakash Jaiswal told Parliament that 12 million illegal Bangladeshi immigrants resided in India. (This claim was withdrawn following protests by the Assam and West Bengal governments.) Former RAW chief Sanjeev Tripathi, in a 2016 paper, estimated the number to be more than 15 million, based on comparisons of census data from Bangladesh and India from 1981 to 2011. The same year, MoS (Home) Kiren Rijiju told Parliament that 20 million illegal Bangladeshi immigrants were living in India, based on unofficial assessments. The deportation of illegal immigrants has been an enduring part of India's domestic policy, cutting across political lines. The UPA government too deported illegal Bangladeshi immigrants. RPN Singh, who served as MoS (Home) from 2012 to 2014, claimed in 2018 that the Manmohan Singh government had deported 82,000 immigrants. These efforts have further picked up under the Narendra Modi government, driven by both national security concerns and ideological motivations. In 2018, then-BJP president and current Union Home Minister Amit Shah had referred to Bangladeshi immigrants as 'termites'. Since 2018, the Modi government has also pursued a more tech-driven approach to the problem. * That year, it launched the portal to collect the biographic and biometric data of Rohingya immigrants. This was later expanded to include Bangladeshi immigrants as well. * In 2023, the government revamped this portal into the Foreigners Identification Portal (FIP) to capture more detailed profiles of suspected illegal immigrants. States/UTs and the Ministry of External Affairs were given access to the portal, which is used to upload and verify details of suspected illegal immigrants. If verification fails, deportation is initiated with help from the Foreigners' Regional Registration Offices (FRROs). * In 2023, the government also introduced a District Police Module on the Immigration Visa Foreigner Registration Tracking (IVFRT) portal to track overstaying foreigners. * Further, biometric capture infrastructure — fingerprint scanners, cameras, and computers — has been deployed across police stations, detention centres, and Border Out Posts (BOPs) of the BSF. A renewed push, novel strategy While the issue was never truly on the back burner, deportation drives have intensified following the terror attack in Pahalgam on April 22, and the beginning of Operation Sindoor on May 7. Currently, states such as Gujarat, Delhi, Assam, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan are rounding up identified illegal immigrants and transporting them to border points in Assam, Tripura, and Meghalaya. From here, they are 'pushed back' across the border by the Border Security Force (BSF). A senior security official told The Indian Express that such deportations have historically had limited success. 'The border is porous. These people often return,' he said. However, the current operation marks a more coordinated, digitised approach to the problem of illegal migration. With biometric data now captured on the FIP, the government hopes re-entry can be checked. The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has also instructed authorities issuing Aadhaar, Voter ID, and Ration Card to cross-check applicants against the immigrant database before issuing documents. The MHA has set a 30-day deadline for States and UTs to verify suspected illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and Myanmar. If verification fails, deportation proceedings will follow. An integrated server will support this process, bringing together data from the IVFRT system, the FIP portal, and the India-Myanmar Border Pass System. Some questions remain Questions around due process, humanitarian concerns, and bilateral sensitivities persist. As more people are rounded up and transported to the borders, courts and civil rights groups are likely to scrutinise the legal and ethical contours of this drive, especially in cases involving pending litigation or individuals caught in border limbo. On May 8, Bangladesh sent a diplomatic note to India registering its protest over the issue. Country's Foreign Affairs Adviser Md Touhid Hossain said on Tuesday that another such note was in the works. 'We see it (deportation) is happening. It is not feasible to resist physically,' he said, stressing the need for diplomatic and legal processes to be followed in resolving consular issues. The issue has always been diplomatically sensitive. In a 2022 BSF-BGB meeting in Dhaka, the Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) reportedly told India that illegal immigration from Bangladesh has reduced, largely due to economic improvements. At one point in 2020-21, Bangladesh's per capita income ($1,962) was higher than India's ($1,935) — a data point that complicates the narrative of large-scale economic migration.
Indian Express
36 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Explained: International efforts to end Israel's war in Gaza
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) on Wednesday (June 4) failed to pass a resolution calling for 'an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza', after a veto by the United States, with all other members voting in favour. The death toll in Gaza has reached almost 55,000 as Israel has continued its renewed ground offensive, launched on May 17, in the Palestinian enclave. Also, the distribution of humanitarian aid, by a US- and Israel-backed NGO, in the Strip has been marred with chaos, confusion, and numerous shooting deaths. How have past international efforts to end Israel's war in Gaza fared? How have international views on Gaza changed over time? What explains Israel's actions? Between October 2023 (when the war began) and June 2025, international efforts to end Israel's war in Gaza focused on three principal fronts – a ceasefire, rebuilding Gaza, and the delivery of humanitarian aid. The objectives of diverse stakeholders across these efforts have all effectively failed. Efforts towards a ceasefire have been made both within and outside of the UN framework. At least seven UNSC Resolutions calling for a ceasefire in Gaza have failed, with Russia and China vetoing two, and the US vetoing five. The UNSC's March 2024 resolution calling for a ceasefire also failed due to Israeli rejections, despite Hamas acceptance. Hamas agreed to release hostages in exchange for Israel releasing Palestinian prisoners. Israel called the UN 'shameless', and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cancelled a then-scheduled trip to the Biden White House. The Trump White House, which prefers to work outside the UN framework, focused on implementing a three-phased ceasefire by January 2025. This too broke down by March, with Phase I only partially complete and Israel violating the agreement to resume operations in Gaza. Amidst ceasefire efforts, both the US and Arab stakeholders have also proposed long-term visions for rebuilding Gaza. For instance, President Donald Trump proposed a plan to forcefully displace Palestinians from Gaza to build a 'riviera'. The Arab League endorsed an Egyptian initiative to rebuild Gaza for Palestinians. While Israel and the US maintain maximalist positions, calling for a complete elimination of Hamas from Gaza, Arab states sidestep the long-term question, restricting their efforts to mediating a ceasefire. The 'Hamas question' has also become complicated, given its continued potency in Gaza, despite significant losses to Israeli action. Even before the October 2023 attack, the international community struggled to reconcile its acceptance of Hamas' position in Palestine as a legitimate actor with the condemnation of its use of terrorism. The effort to ensure humanitarian aid to Gaza's 2.1 million civilians — 100% of whom are on the brink of starvation according to the UN — has fallen disastrously short. Israel's complete rejection of the UN as a legitimate avenue has disabled aid delivery, especially since March. Israel banned the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine (UNRWA) last October, and both the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Israeli settlers actively prevented most aid trucks from reaching designated destinations in Gaza, citing security risks vis-à-vis Hamas. Even when Israel did allow limited aid delivery in May, the UN deemed it insufficient for the scale of Gaza's humanitarian crisis. Rather, Israel prefers aid delivery with a heavily militarised approach, through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), which the UN Secretary General has deemed incompatible with international law. First, the Trump administration's policy in the broader Middle East has been detrimental to Israel's stated interests. In the last three months, Washington has engaged with and legitimised Syria's Ahmed Al-Sharaa (who Israel opposes) and concluded a ceasefire with the Houthis in exchange for a cessation of attacks on international shipping (attacks on Israel and Israel-linked shipping have continued). The US also circumvented Israel entirely to negotiate directly with Hamas (in Qatar) for the release of an Israeli American hostage in May. The Trump administration has continued negotiations with Iran to potentially reach a nuclear deal — another policy anathema to Israel. Second, the critical position of Arab states (including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco which recognised Israel with the signing of the 2020 Abraham Accords) has hardened further as Israel expands its war. Israel also drew the ire of Arab states after it 'banned' a five-country Arab delegation (including Saudi Arabia and UAE) from visiting the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank in early June. Internationally, the Arab effort has focused on garnering greater recognition for the Palestinian state. Saudi Arabia, along with France, is set to jointly host a UN conference on the two-state solution later this month. Third, European states have grown increasingly critical of Israel, primarily due to Israel's blocking of aid delivery. In May, Canada, France, and the United Kingdom issued a rare and categorical rebuke of Israel's actions and committed to 'recognizing a Palestinian state as a contribution to achieving a two-state solution'. Both Israel and the US have warned European states against recognising Palestine, even as Spain, Norway, and Ireland formally recognised the State of Palestine on May 28. The evolution of the United Kingdom's position is a case in point. Compared to the UNSC's failed October 2023 resolution calling for a ceasefire, where the UK abstained, it now consistently votes in favour of such resolutions even without condemnations of Hamas. Explaining its June 2025 vote in favour, the UK deemed Israel's new operation 'unjustifiable, disproportionate and counterproductive'. The growing international (non-American) pressure has led Israel to expand and intensify its operations in Gaza (and settlement activity in the West Bank), rather than disabling them. For instance, a week prior to Trump's Middle East tour in May, the Israeli cabinet officially approved a plan to 'capture' Gaza and hold territory through an expanded operation (Op Gideon's Chariot). This operation in turn has cemented the failure of international efforts towards a ceasefire and aid delivery, and has been the key trigger for adverse international reactions towards Israel, and greater recognition of Palestinian sovereignty. Note that while US policy towards the Middle East has pushed against Israel's interests, Washington has compensated by backing Israeli actions in Palestine through continuing diplomatic and military support. 'Trump restrains Netanyahu's regional ambitions but gives him a free hand with the Palestinians,' Aluff Benn, the Editor in Chief of Israel's Haaretz newspaper recently said. Effectively, this has emboldened Netanyahu to push for Israel's indefinite occupation of Gaza. For Netanyahu, occupying Gaza is not a new objective to push back against mounting international pressure, but is rather a historic endeavour. In 2005, when Prime Minister Ariel Sharon withdrew Israel's illegal settlements from the Strip, Netanyahu had resigned from Sharon's government to oppose the move. That Israel has now been further emboldened was evident in Netanyahu declaring on Thursday (June 5) that Israel was arming a number of criminal gangs in Gaza to fight Hamas. This was the first such confirmation from the Israeli government and a tactic similar to Netanyahu's preference of tacitly 'partnering' with Hamas in past decades to undercut the possibility of a unified Palestinian leadership. As the IDF's recent call for over 400,000 reservists to active duty shows, Israel is gearing up towards a large-scale occupation of Gaza. For the current Israeli Prime Minister, the overt American support and the unwillingness of Arab and European states to sanction Israel or undertake substantial punitive measures are sufficient to press forward with occupation, and further disable the possibility of a Palestinian state. As is a recurring theme in Palestine, global support for Palestinian statehood occurs alongside Israel's physical erosion of its possibility.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
‘Wasn't sure I would return': ‘Pushed into Bangladesh' despite case in Supreme Court, Assam man is back home in time for Eid
Two weeks after he was detained from his home and allegedly pushed into Bangladesh by security forces, 51-year-old Khairul Islam celebrated Eid with his family in Assam's Morigaon district after he was brought back and handed over to his family. 'There are no words for the thoughts that were going through my head during those two days that I was in Bangladesh. I was fearful, I was not sure if I would ever be able to come back to my family,' he told The Indian Express, speaking from his home. Islam, a former government school primary teacher, had been declared a foreigner by a Foreigners Tribunal in 2016. As reported by The Indian Express, his special leave petition against the FT order was granted by the Supreme Court in December 2024, despite which he was detained by police on May 23 as part of an ongoing crackdown against declared foreigners in Assam. On May 27, a video uploaded on social media by a Bangladeshi journalist of Khairul Islam was the first indication that declared foreigners were being pushed across the International Border into the country. In the video, which purportedly shown Islam in Bangladesh's Kurigram district, he could be heard saying that on May 23, he was taken by the police from his home to the Matia transit camp – the dedicated detention centre to house 'illegal foreigners' in Assam – and that he was put into a bus with his hands tied and pushed across the border with 13 others on May 27. A few days later, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma confirmed that the government is pushing back declared foreigners, citing a February 4 Supreme Court order. However, Sarma also said that those with appeals pending before the Gauhati High Court or the Supreme Court 'are not being troubled.' 'My wife had seen the video of me stuck in no-man's land. At the same time, the CM also said that people with cases in the High Court and Supreme Court can't be picked up. Because I have my Supreme Court case, she made an appeal to the border branch of the Superintendent of Police's office and they assured her that they will try to bring me back in a few days. So that's how I was brought back to Assam, and I came back to my home on Thursday night,' he said. He recounted the day that the video of him was taken: 'After the security forces took us to the border and pushed us into Bangladesh, there was nowhere for us to go. The Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) also pushed us away and sent us back to the zero line or the no-man's land. That was where we were the whole day, under the sun in the paddy field. I was with 13 other people. When the media there wanted us to speak, I had to speak about our plight because the rest were unable to speak with clarity. After spending the whole day there, the BGB took us to their camp and gave us food to eat. I remember it was egg and dal. The next morning, we were taken to another camp and we spent the rest of the day there until, in the evening, seven of us were handed over back to the BSF,' he said. Islam has been battling his citizenship case for a decade now and had spent two years in detention in Tezpur central jail after the Gauhati High Court had upheld the FT order in 2018. 'I have complete hope that I will be given justice by the Supreme Court when the time comes. For now, I am glad that I am with my family today,' he said.
