{"id":6565,"date":"2026-06-29T07:31:44","date_gmt":"2026-06-29T07:31:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/myanmarmuslim.news\/en\/?p=6565"},"modified":"2026-06-29T07:31:46","modified_gmt":"2026-06-29T07:31:46","slug":"rohingya-problem-and-bangladesh-myanmar-relations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/myanmarmuslim.news\/en\/2026\/06\/29\/rohingya-problem-and-bangladesh-myanmar-relations\/","title":{"rendered":"“Rohingya Problem and Bangladesh-Myanmar Relations”"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

It’s a genuinely fascinating historical document. Habibullah was clearly a well-read writer \u2014 the fact that he was tracing the Rohingya crisis all the way back to Bodawpaya’s 1784 conquest and the Magh piracy era, in a mainstream Dhaka newspaper in 1992, shows remarkable foresight. Most of the world wasn’t paying serious attention to the Rohingya issue until decades later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Translated by Claude AI<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dhaka Sangbad (Bengali), 1 February 1992, Page 4<\/strong>
Author: Habibullah<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

We have been excessively silent regarding Bangladesh-Myanmar relations. Looking back through history over the past 200 years, we find that the people of Bengal suffered enormous hardships because of this silence. The piracy of the Magh (Arakanese) sea raiders, originating from Myanmar (Arakan), once threatened the very fabric of Bengali civic life. They would reach the Meghna river delta, capture Bengalis, sell them into slavery, and transport many to Arakan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In truth, Bangladesh-Myanmar bilateral relations as seen from Bangladesh’s perspective are completely different from how the Myanmar government views them. Since 1948, hundreds of thousands of Rohingya \u2014 citizens of Myanmar \u2014 have been forced to enter Bangladeshi territory in waves. Yet the Myanmar government continues to speak only of maintaining good neighbourly relations with Bangladesh. To this day, the policy of driving the Rohingya out of Arakan by the Maghs has not ceased.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Only when the rights of the Rohingya people are recognised within Myanmar’s political system will there be any prospect of fundamental progress in Bangladesh-Myanmar relations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since Myanmar’s independence on 4 January 1948, the process of expelling the Rohingya from Arakan and pushing them into Bangladesh has continued uninterrupted \u2014 and this policy persists to this day. The question of why and how the Rohingya came to be displaced in this manner remains unanswered even now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Language and Identity<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The Rohingya of Arakan speak a dialect called Ru\u00e1ingga<\/em> (Rohinggi), which is entirely distinct from the local dialect of Chittagong. About three decades prior to the time of writing, conflicts between Ru\u00e1ingga<\/em> speakers and Chittagong-dialect (Chakte\/Keti<\/em>) speakers had disturbed the entire social fabric of Chittagong district.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At that time, greater Chittagong district extended to the Feni river and was part of the independent Roshang<\/em> (Arakan) state. Arakan was also known as Roshang<\/em> in that era. Chittagong-dialect speakers were called Chakte<\/em> by the Ru\u00e1ingga<\/em> people. The Chakte<\/em> lived in the northern part of Chittagong, while a small group of Ru\u00e1ingga<\/em> lived in what is now known as Cox’s Bazar district.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

About 200 years ago, the Cox’s Bazar area was almost entirely uninhabited, though there was some sparse settlement in the Ramu area. The ancestral families of Ramu are said to be descendants of the retinue who accompanied the Magh prince Sharshu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In reality, it was the refugees arriving from Arakan who transformed the forested uplands of Cox’s Bazar into cultivable, habitable land \u2014 a historically noteworthy fact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Burmese Conquest of Arakan (1784)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In 1784, the Burmese King Bodawpaya attacked and annexed Arakan, converting it into a province of Burma and ending centuries of Arakanese independence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u2705 Factually correct. Bodawpaya conquered Arakan in 1784\u201385.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The Maghs of that era were associated with piracy. Sandwip and Dianga in Chittagong were key centres of Magh activity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u2705 Historically accurate. Magh-Portuguese piracy from these bases was well documented in the 17th century.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The Nawab of Dhaka’s forces drove the Maghs from Chittagong, whereupon they retreated to Arakan \u2014 though these pirate Maghs did not attain high standing within Arakanese Magh society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Meanwhile, during the reign of the Arakanese dynasty of Sandathudama<\/em> (Chandrasudharma), the Magh prince Sharshu arrived with his family in Arakan and conflict broke out. Muslims of the Roshang region marched on the palace and destroyed the Arakanese court by force of arms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Initially, Muslims chose and installed their preferred king, and removed him if unsatisfied. This continued until around 1710, when an Arakanese local ruler called Sandawimzesa<\/em> disarmed the Muslims and granted them the territories of Rambree and Cheduba.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u26a0\ufe0f Partially accurate but compressed. The period of Muslim influence in the Arakan court (roughly 1430\u20131531 under kings bearing Muslim names, and thereafter) is a real historical phenomenon, but the account here conflates different centuries and rulers. Treat as a simplified popular narrative.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

From that point, Muslims set aside arms and took to farming. Over time, local opportunists exploited Muslim passivity and entered the political arena.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 1782, a local chieftain in the Roshang region named Ngasande<\/em> travelled to Ava (the Burmese capital) and incited King Bodawpaya to invade Arakan. Under the agreement, Bodawpaya promised to place Ngasande on the Arakanese throne \u2014 but broke this promise, and Arakan was absorbed into Burma.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u2705 The role of Ngasande (also spelled Nga Thande) in inviting Bodawpaya to invade is a documented historical claim.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

At that time, Muslims in the Roshang region were politically powerless. Under the oppression of the Burmese military, the people of Arakan fled their homeland and sought refuge in British-controlled Chittagong.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From 1784 to 1798, roughly two-thirds of Arakan’s population abandoned their homeland. The Rohingya took shelter within the Muslim communities of Chittagong and continued to resist in southern Burma.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u26a0\ufe0f The two-thirds figure is cited in some sources but is debated. Large-scale flight from Arakan after 1784 is well established.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, from the time of the Rohingya’s arrival, Ru\u00e1ingga-Chakte<\/em> ethnic conflicts occurred, and the Ru\u00e1ingga<\/em>\/Rohingya subsequently moved southward into Cox’s Bazar district, where they formed settled communities until 1865.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

British Period and Anglo-Burmese Wars<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The First Anglo-Burmese War arose in connection with the Magh liberation struggle against Burma beginning in 1784. After the Second Anglo-Burmese War of 1823\u20131824, Arakan came under the control of the British East India Company.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u26a0\ufe0f Minor factual note: The First Anglo-Burmese War was 1824\u20131826, not beginning in 1823. The Second Anglo-Burmese War was 1852. These dates appear slightly garbled in the source text.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

After establishing stability in Arakan, the British facilitated the return of the Rohingya. The British government enacted the Arakan Land Settlement Laws of 1839 and 1841, and the Pegu (Bago) Land Act of 1865, which allotted new land to Rohingya settlers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Rohingya converted forested highland into farmland and established permanent settlements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the later period of British rule, a trend emerged among the Arakanese community of treating the Rohingya as outsiders. According to Arakanese scholars, the British “divide and rule” policy created the Rohingya-Magh conflict.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Independence Era<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

When nationalist and independence movements began in both British India and British Burma, Arakanese Magh leaders also became active. However, the Magh community viewed the Rohingya as an obstacle to the Arakanese independence movement \u2014 particularly given the large Rohingya population in Maungdaw and Buthidaung, strategically located on the Bangladesh border.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Magh leaders considered this strategic location ideal for armed insurgency \u2014 useful militarily whether action was directed against Burma or Bangladesh. The Magh community dreamed of building a greater Arakan encompassing Chittagong.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League (AFPFL), led by General Aung San, formed a provisional government after defeating the Japanese in 1945. The AFPFL sought full independence from Britain, as India had done.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, ethnic groups including the Karen, Shan, Chin, Mon, Kayah and Lahu demanded their own separate independence rather than falling under a Burman-majority state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the London talks of 1946, British Prime Minister Attlee advised General Aung San that he must either secure the support of other ethnic groups or accept independence for Burma confined to Burman-majority areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Accordingly, at the Panglong Conference on 1 February 1947, agreements were reached and the Panglong Agreement was signed on 12 February 1947<\/strong> on the following principles:<\/p>\n\n\n\n