COVER STORY

RECOMMEND (195)

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PLUSONE

MORE

E-MAIL

PRINT

TEXT SIZE

The UNHCR, whose mandate does not cover the India-Burma border in the northeast, agrees that warming bilateral relations may have affected the situation there. In the mid-1990s, refugee camps along the border were disbanded and thousands were repatriated to Burma, but an estimated 50,000 remain. This is not the case in New Delhi, however, which the UNHCR says still holds a "tolerant attitude" towards refugees. India has not ratified any UN convention on refugees nor have they passed legislation of their own to deal with their burgeoning refugee population. According to a report issued by the New Delhi-based South Asian Human Rights Documentation Center (SAHRDC), this legislative lacunae has "led to the use of refugees as pawns in regional geo-politics" by the Indian government. SAHRDC cites incidents of forced repatriation by Indian authorities to support their claims. "The Indian government is playing footsies with the Burmese regime and it is affecting refugees," says Ravi Nair, executive director of the SAHRDC. He adds that the UNHCR has been ineffective in staving off this external influence. "They [UNHCR] are always looking over their shoulder to see what the Indian government and Geneva [UNHCR headquarters] are saying." But refugees are not the only group to come under fire since the government’s policy shift. Over the last two years, two prominent Burmese journalists working on Indian soil have been arrested. Although both have since been released, their activities continue to be monitored. Neither has received any support from the UNHCR, says Soe Myint, who was mysteriously re-arrested in April, 12 years after hijacking an airplane with a bar of soap disguised as a bomb—a move he hoped would win international support for Burma’s democracy movement. "The UNHCR advised me to tell Soe Myint to ease up on his activities," charges his lawyer, Haksar. "They asked, ‘can’t you tell him to stop?’ As a human rights lawyer I can’t ask a journalist to not write." Other critics in New Delhi say that rather than fulfilling their mandate in protecting refugees, the UNHCR is more concerned with maintaining its presence and positive rapport with the Indian government—a relationship they say is not in tune with democratic principles. "The UNHCR is colluding with the government in restricting press freedoms," says Nair, when asked about the two Burmese journalists. "The UNHCR has nothing to do with bloody protection." The UNHCR, however, maintains that they only advise Burmese journalists to keep a low profile so as not to ruin it for the other Burmese here. "We don’t encourage them to take up political activities," says Wei-Meng. "Why should a couple of people jeopardize the whole community? They are staying here on the goodwill of the Indian government." Indian activists say this is a central reason they became involved in helping the Burmese refugees. They say it is imperative to supply refugees with resources to help strengthen their political skills instead of following the UNHCR line, which they say could stunt their political growth. "When the UNHCR does not take the issue of refugees seriously, someone else must become involved," says E Deenadayalan, general secretary of the New Delhi-based The Other Media, a research group that follows politically sensitive issues. "We have to help sharpen and broaden their political consciousness." Refugees who have been recognized by the UNHCR here also say the organization has not been doing enough and that their vision of self-reliance for asylum seekers in New Delhi is unrealistic given the lack of jobs. Most single Burmese asylum seekers receive 1,400 rupees (US $30) per month; wives and children of married men receive an additional 600 rupees per month. But according to the SAHRDC, some recent arrivals have been denied a subsistence allowance (SA). And as part of the new self-reliance scheme, the UNHCR has been reviewing cases to assess who they feel no longer needs to receive SA. However, critics say the UNHCR has revoked SA without notice, leaving refugees few options to ensure their survival. "The UNHCR always threatens to take our SA away," says Dr Ro Ding, an active Burmese dissident in New Delhi. "We all want to work but it is very difficult." According to the UNHCR’s policy on refugees in urban areas: "[U]nassisted refugees cannot be regarded as ‘self-reliant’ if they are living in abject poverty and are obliged to engage in illicit activities in order to survive.… Refugees who have very limited access to public services and social support systems cannot realistically be expected to attain self-reliance." Critics of the program say that self-reliance is unattainable for most refugees and that it is shortsighted to think otherwise. "They [UNHCR] have done really inhumane things," says Haksar.