Green Criminology and the Rohingya Refugee Crisis

The Rohingya refugee crisis, one of the worst humanitarian crises of the 21st century, caused serious environmental damage in the host areas and widespread violations of human rights. This article examines the crisis through the lens of green criminology, focusing on environmental harm and victimization experienced by both displaced Rohingya populations and local ecosystems in Bangladesh. This study uses a qualitative methodology to investigate how both state and non-state actors contribute to ecological destruction, exacerbating vulnerabilities for refugees and host communities. The findings underline the intersections between environmental injustice, forced migration, and structural violence, calling for integrated policy responses that address both humanitarian and ecological dimensions of the crisis.

 

 

Introduction

The Rohingya, a predominantly Muslim ethnic minority from Myanmar’s Rakhine State, have faced systematic persecution and ethnic cleansing, culminating in a mass exodus following the 2017 military crackdown. One of the largest refugee camps in the world has been established in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh, where over a million migrants have sought safety (Amnesty International, 2018). From a criminological perspective, the environmental effects of the crisis remain understudied, despite extensive reporting on the humanitarian aspects of the crisis.

 

 

Green criminology, a subfield of criminology that examines environmental harms and crimes (Lynch & Stretesky, 2014), offers a critical framework for analyzing the ecological devastation associated with the Rohingya crisis. 

 

 

This article explores how unplanned, rapidly growing refugee settlements have disproportionately harmed local host communities and displaced individuals, leading to deforestation, soil erosion, and water contamination. 

 

 

It also critiques how international negligence, corporate interests, and government policies perpetuate environmental victimization.

 

 

Background: The Rohingya Crisis

 

 

The Rohingya, an ethnic group from Rakhine State in Myanmar that is primarily Muslim, have faced decades of systematic discrimination, statelessness, and violence. The situation deteriorated dramatically in 2017 when the Myanmar military launched a brutal campaign described by the United Nations as a "textbook example of ethnic cleansing" (OHCHR, 2017). The roots of the crisis are deeply historical, involving colonial legacies, nationalist politics, and ethnic tensions, which led to a mass exodus of Rohingya to neighboring Bangladesh.

 

 

During British colonial rule (1824–1948), the region now known as Rakhine (formerly Arakan) saw increased migration of Muslim laborers from Bengal to Burma, which was encouraged by the British administration. As local Buddhist people began to view the Muslim minority as colonial collaborators and a demographic threat, this movement planted the roots for future ethnic conflicts (Yegar, 1972; Leider, 2018).

 

 

Following Burma's independence in 1948, issues of citizenship and national identity took the stage. Some Rohingya were granted citizenship by the 1948 Union Citizenship Act, but things gradually got worse. General Ne Win's military administration, which came to power in 1962, started a systematic "Burmanization" effort that disadvantaged Muslims and other ethnic minorities. There was a growing exclusion of the Rohingya from documentation and public life.

 

 

The 1982 Citizenship Law, which denied citizenship to the Rohingya unless they could demonstrate ancestors in Myanmar before 1823, a nearly impossible task considering their lack of documentation and historical marginalization, was a significant turning point. Most Rohingya become stateless as a result of the law (Human Rights Watch, 2000). 

 

 

In response to the humanitarian catastrophe, Bangladesh allowed Rohingya refugees to establish temporary camps in the Cox's Bazar region, which is currently the largest refugee settlement in the world. The rapid and unplanned influx of people into ecologically sensitive areas led to severe environmental degradation, deforestation, soil erosion, and depletion of water resources (UNDP, 2018).

 

 

Green Criminology in Cox’s Bazar: A Case Study

 

 

Deforestation and Habitat Loss: Wildlife habitats were destroyed and human-animal conflict escalated as a result of the clearing of more than 6,000 acres of forest to make accommodation inside the refugee camps (UNHCR & IUCN, 2019). Additionally, the loss of tree cover increased the likelihood of flooding and landslides, particularly during the monsoon season.

 

 

Water Scarcity and Pollution: Groundwater supplies were severely strained by the sudden increase in population. Overuse of tube wells, improper sanitation, and inadequate waste management led to health hazards and water pollution (REACH, 2018).

 

 

Soil Erosion and Natural Disaster Vulnerability: The construction of temporary shelters and the loss of vegetation cover worsened soil erosion and made the refugee population more vulnerable to landslides and cyclones (ISCG, 2018).

 

 

Green Victimization of the Rohingya

Primary Victimisation: The original displacement from Myanmar involved Ecological dispossession, including village burning, land grabs, and militarised devastation of habitats linked to Rohingya livelihoods.

 

 

Secondary Victimisation: In Bangladesh, the Rohingya face new forms of victimisation:

 

Confinement to ecologically unstable terrain.

 

Exclusion from sustainable development and environmental decision-making.

 

Exposure to environmental risks without legal recognition or 

protection.

 

Tertiary Victimisation: The implemented relocation of refugees to Bhasan Char, a remote, flood-prone island, raises serious concerns. Critics urged that this is an example of ecological containment, which uses environmental isolation as a cover for humanitarian action to manage refugees.

 

 

Environmental Injustice and Structural Violence

 

 

Environmental injustice arises when marginalized communities disproportionately experience ecological harm. This is best demonstrated by the Rohingya issue, as their forced migration placed them in environmentally vulnerable areas with minimal protection (Pellow, 2002). This relationship between environmental degradation and structural violence exemplifies what Galtung (1969) called the "slow violence" of social inequality, which manifests as a gradual decline in living conditions.

 

 

State Crime and Institutional Failure

 

 

Green criminologists contend that strong institutions' actions or inactions frequently cause environmental harm (White, 2011). In this sense, Bangladesh and Myanmar are both accountable. 

 

 

Myanmar committed direct violence against the Rohingya, forcing them into exile.

 

 

Bangladesh, although acting from a humanitarian perspective, failed to implement adequate environmental planning, resulting in ecological degradation.

 

 

It is also necessary to examine the role of international actors, such as the UN and NGOs. Despite their involvement in relief operations, there was insufficient early investment in sustainable infrastructure and environmental management.

 

 

Conclusion

The Rohingya refugee crisis is a complex tragedy characterized by environmental degradation, humanitarian suffering, and state aggression. Green criminology provides critical insights into how ecological harms compound the victimization of displaced populations and extend beyond human interests. Scholars and policymakers are urged to respond to humanitarian crises in a more comprehensive and just manner by acknowledging green victimization in this context. Without addressing the environmental dimensions of displacement, any solution remains partial and ultimately unsustainable.

 

 

Muhammad Alamghir, PPM, is a skilled law enforcement professional with over 25 years of national and international policing experience. He is acknowledged for his expertise in crime prevention, global and regional security, migration, and counterterrorism.