Australia and Indonesia, the Co‐Chairs of the Bali Process on People Smuggling, Trafficking in Persons and Related Transnational Crime, have been asked by regional experts to fulfil a promise made after the 2015 Andaman Sea crisis by responding quickly to the refugee crisis in Myanmar and Bangladesh. This is an historic opportunity for the Bali Process to demonstrate its value and the benefit of cooperation problem solving in the region.
The Asia Dialogue on Forced Migration (ADFM), an expert group recognised by the Bali Process for its independent policy advice, told senior officials following its meeting in Manila last week that the conditions for triggering the Consultation Mechanism established by ministers after the 2015 crisis have been met.
“The ADFM’s strong view is that the Bali Process Consultation Mechanism must be activated”, said Tri Nuke Pudjiastuti, of the Indonesian Institute of Sciences, one of the four convening organisations of the ADFM. “Retno Marsudi and Julie Bishop, Indonesian and Australian Foreign Ministers and Bali Process Co‐Chairs, convinced fellow ministers to institute vital reforms in March 2016 so that the failure of the Bali Process to act during the 2015 Andaman Sea crisis would not happen again. Those reforms should now be put to work.”
“In addition to the Co‐Chairs triggering the Consultation Mechanism, Indonesia should continue to encourage a single ASEAN position on the crisis. So too Australia with other Bali Process members.”
In March 2016, Bali Process ministers pledged more agile and timely responses to urgent irregular migration. They created a Consultation Mechanism for fast communication and coordination in emergency situations. Senior officials reviewed the 2015 Andaman Sea crisis and agreed to more reforms in November 2016. “Activating the Consultation Mechanism could achieve several objectives”, said Steve Wong, of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia. “First and foremost, it would ensure there is an honest broker with authority and legitimacy to share information and coordinate policy responses in the region.”
“How this crisis unfolds from here is predictable”, said Sriprapha Petcharamesree, from the Institute of Human Rights and Peace Studies at Mahidol University, Thailand. “Bali Process senior officials should explore responses to potential scenarios, including ongoing conflict in Rakhine State, further assistance required by Bangladesh authorities and international agencies, onward maritime movements, exploitation by people smuggling and human trafficking networks, Myanmar’s willingness to allow people to return, and resettlement options for those people permanently displaced.”
“It’s time for Australia and Indonesia to deliver on the promise they made as Co‐Chairs of the Bali Process in March 2016”, said Travers McLeod, CEO of the Centre for Policy Development. “Stepping up could make a huge difference to the region’s most vulnerable people and give other regional structures like ASEAN confidence to take appropriate action. Failure to act risks undermining the credibility of the Bali Process and would be inconsistent with important progress made over the past 18 months.”
“With more than 400,000 people estimated to have fled Myanmar for Bangladesh since violence broke out in Rakhine State on 25 August, this is an historic opportunity for the Bali Process to demonstrate its value and the benefits of cooperative problem solving in the region.”
Travers McLeod is Chief Executive Officer, Centre for Policy Development.
John Menadue is the Founder of Pearls and Irritations and a board member. He was formerly the Editor-in-Chief. John was the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet under Gough Whitlam and Malcolm Fraser, Ambassador to Japan, Secretary of the Department of Immigration and CEO of Qantas.
Comments
One response to “TRAVERS McLEOD. Opportunity for regional leadership on Rohingya refugees.”
It is odd that this article (which seems to be a press release) calls for a Bali Process response, but the adjacent article from Human Rights Watch is silent on this. The Related article “Regional cooperation on refugees, Bali and a Track II Dialogue” from Feb 2016 is critical of the Bali Process, and it has been widely discounted by others as having a security focus rather than a refugee focus.
I interpreted the Track 2 Dialogue as a practitioner workshop prioritising the saving and enhancement of refugee lives rather than the kneejerk political responses of the 45 country members of Bali P within its complex architecture. Indonesia’s expression of concern and Malaysia’s recent concessions to work and other rights is relevant here.
Bali doesn’t seem to have helped the standoff in 2015 when the Rohingya refugees were stranded in the Andaman Sea. AFAIK the temporary sanctuary to them in Malaysia and Thailand was on the basis that other countries would offer re-settlement but this has not happened. Why do you expect change through this process?