How Rohingya ‘humanitarian corridor’ in Bangladesh can be a new headache for India – Firstpost

While the world has been watching the northwestern border of India, it is across the northeastern border with Bangladesh that critical developments have quietly taken place. United Nations Chief Antonio Guterres had, in March 2025, on a visit to Dhaka, proposed a “humanitarian corridor” for Rohingya repatriation.

In response to the suggestion, the unelected Yunus-led interim government is pushing the humanitarian corridor plan forward. The sudden appointment of Khalilur Rahman, who holds the position of High Representative of the Rohingya Issue as Bangladesh’s National Security Advisor (NSA), also points towards a determined interest in pushing the plan without any internal or external consensus on the matter or dialogue on the repercussions of the same. Bangladesh’s foreign affairs advisor Md Towhid Hossain has stated that the corridor will be used to send humanitarian aid to Myanmar’s Rakhine state as well as send the Rohingya refugees back who are largely settled in Cox’s Bazar in Bangladesh. However, the 1.3 million Rohingya refugees have consistently refused to go back to Rakhine State in Myanmar since 2017.

Nevertheless, this unilateral decision has come under fire in Bangladesh from the opposition. First, it is not under the purview of the unelected interim government to take such decisions. Second, other political stakeholders were not consulted. The now-banned Awami League has opposed the corridor, suggesting the West could use the corridor to wage a war against the military junta in Myanmar. Other political parties, such as the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, have also been critical of this unilateral decision. The common fear is that a so-called “ humanitarian corridor” will jeopardise the sovereignty of Bangladesh.

Unfortunately, Bangladesh seems to be in a free fall with no foreseeable elections. Democracy has taken a backseat while the blue-eyed boy of the West and Chief Advisor to the interim government, Muhammed Yunus, panders to the new dispensation in the United States. The fate of Bangladesh rests in his hands, but the outcome of such serious decisions is bound to have an impact on the fragile regional stability around India’s neighbourhood. But with Yunus focused on Western interests, Bangladesh is likely to become a centre of geopolitical contestations.

Apart from the US and the United Nations, it was also delegations from the International Crisis Group that had earlier this year advised Yunus to start engagement with the Arakan Army (AA) in Myanmar, an ethnic armed organisation (EAO) that has emerged as the most powerful group in conflict-ridden Myanmar. Not only is it challenging the Tatmadaw, but it has also negotiated with China to keep its assets, such as the Kyaukphyu deep sea port, safe. It has also arranged a deal for the resumption of construction of the port, with Chinese workers having landed in Rakhine.

There is also the news of the Joint Security Venture Company (JSVC) floated by the State Administration Council (SAC), which would allow private security companies to arrange for protection for their own infrastructural interests. China is keen to make use of this provision and will have its boots on the ground quicker than any other country. It was, after all, in 2023 that Operation 1027 and, subsequently, 1107 were launched by the Three Brotherhood Alliance in northern Shan state against the Tatmadaw, backed by China.

The alliance consisted of the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA), the Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA) and the Arakan Army (AA). The AA had stationed almost 6,000 soldiers in the northern region to support the alliance besides providing support to other smaller EAOs around Myanmar. Additionally, AA has also received considerable support from Wa State, the de facto independent , autonomous and self-governing state with considerable Chinese influence.

Today, China wields influence not just on the Tatmadaw but also on several EAOs, making the West jittery. On the other hand, India too has channels of communication open with both sides in order to prioritise the security of the 1,640 km of porous borders that it shares with Myanmar. The insistence of the West on opening a humanitarian corridor while Bangladesh is grappling with political instability, economic crisis and internal security issues, apart from the glaring fact that an unelected government is making a unilateral decision, should therefore raise alarms across the region.

It is not a coincidence that the Awami League has been suddenly banned and will be referred by Yunus to the International Criminal Court in The Hague and that the pro-Hasina Army Chief General Waqar-uz-Zaman was in Russia on an official visit when Khalilur Rahman was appointed the NSA. Many insiders have speculated that Rahman’s elevation was done to counter the Army Chief’s position in order to clear the path for a humanitarian corridor. Zaman in all likelihood would have objected to the corridor, keeping in mind the security challenges it will pose to Bangladesh. But today there is a possibility that he may be a reluctant participant in the plan in order to safeguard his position. Especially since there have also been rampant news reports of United States Air Force planes with large cargo arriving in Shah Jalal International Airport, presumably carrying crucial military supplies to aid AA and other EAOs.

This is exactly the problem with humanitarian corridors. They have time and again failed to become the safe passages that they should be. Instead of being demilitarised zones that can allow humanitarian aid and facilitate the movement of affected civilians, their potential misuse works towards exacerbating a conflict. Whether it was in Mariupol, Ukraine, or Syria, humanitarian corridors have failed.

There was bombing of corridors in Ukraine, and in Syria they were used to regain opposition-held cities. In the case of Bangladesh, considering the interim government has not made the conditions of the promised corridor public and the decision has been taken without public or political consensus, it is but natural to assume that it is on the behest of the West to gain a foothold in Bangladesh and Myanmar.

The chances are that not only will the corridor be used to pass military equipment to EAOs in Myanmar, but it could also be used by terrorist organisations in Bangladesh as safe passage for illegal drug trafficking , which is already a huge problem for the country. Neighbouring Myanmar is the largest hub of not just poppy cultivation but also synthetic drug manufacturing.

What makes this proposed “humanitarian corridor” plan even more dubious is that none of the Rohingyas in Bangladesh or, for that matter, those illegally settled in India have any intention of going back to Rakhine. Neither do they feel that their protection can be assured, nor do they want to go back to a country that is in a state of conflict lacking basic necessities, administration and economic opportunities. Additionally, the Rohingyas are represented by the armed Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), making clashes between the AA and ARSA a possibility, turning Bangladesh into a war zone.

Finally, India must remain vigilant against the growing influence of the US not just in Bangladesh but also in Myanmar. Even though the Arakan Army is a formidable EAO in Myanmar with a young and dynamic leadership, it is also one of the youngest armed organisations in the region, established only in 2009.

The West, led by the US, has supported the resistance against the Tatmadaw; it would make sense to them to back the AA against the SAC, resulting in turmoil on India’s northeast borders.

India should remember the neighbouring Chin State is Christian-dominated, and recently it was Crisis Management Initiative (CMI), an organisation from Helsinki, that negotiated between two warring Chin factions. The US, to gain a foothold and counter China as well as India, can attempt to splinter AA and influence and manipulate the delicate relationship between transnational ethnic communities. As of now, AA is wary of the West. But it doesn’t take long for the tide to turn with the right offer.

Rami Niranjan Desai is an anthropologist and a scholar of the northeast region of India. She is a columnist and author and presently Distinguished Fellow at India Foundation, New Delhi. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of Firstpost.