& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Unease and Intrigue in Cox’s Bazar
Foreign Minister ASM Mustafizur Rahman sounded a highly optimistic note on Saturday about the prospect of an early repatriation of the 250.000 Myanmar refugees currently living in camps in Cox's Bazar ana Banderban districts He told reporters that the first batch of Rohingya refugees would be leaving "soon", under provisions of the April 28 bilateral accord which ne insisted was a 'very good one.'' The minister's faith in the feasibility of the April 28 accord is a commendable one. out. tn the absence of any visible willingness among the refugees to volunteer to return, one can legitimately wonder if that faith is not also a slightly misplaced one.
The accord itself has. so far. failed to generate the kind of confidence necessary to persuade refugees that their lot would be a happier one if they went back By all accounts, this lack of confidence has resulted from the absence of any supervisory or monitoring role for the United Nations tn the accord. For Bangladesh to have assumed that the refugees, who had left behind their homes to escape what they considered to bo state-sponsored terror, would agree to return without tne kind of assurance that only a United Nations presence could provide, was perhaps a little too optimistic. Bangladesh s failure to persuade or force Myanmar to accept UN supervision and monitoring is now proving to be an expensive one. as the social, economic and environmental cost of continued presence of the refugees mount dally
Another factor has now come to the force which is threatening to turn the issue Into an ugly one According to a report published In this paper on Sunday, several Rohingya groups. Including the Rohingya Solidarity Organlsation(RSO) and the Arakan Rohingya Islamic FrontlARIF) are actively discouraging, even threatening, refugees who may be willing to volunteer for repatriation. These groups, which are not recognised by the Bangladesh government as bonafide representatives of the Rohingya people, are reportedly getting assistance from a number of local political groups and some foreign voluntary, humanitarian organisations. Such activities by non-national organisations are a wholly unwelcome development, as they bring the government's authority in the region Into question. The government should investigate the reports and find out to what extent foreign non government organisations(NGOs) are involved in tne political aspects of the problem, and make it quite clear that such activities are not compatible with their status in this country. If a foreign organisation wishes to run a hospital or two. then that is quite fine, but If it engages In financing or assisting in other ways Rohingya or local political groups, then that Is totally unacceptable.
With genuine refugee unease and political intrigue on the one hand, and Myanmar resistance to International involvement on the other. Mustftzur Rahman certainly has. despite his unbounded optimism, a considerable degree of Problem. With crores of Taka worth of forestry ring destroyed every month, the cost to the environment alone Is a crippling one And politicisation of the issue is now creating a problem which may soon get out of hand The foreign minister has Invested heavily on Myanmar's "goodwill" and maintenance of friendly relations". It is time that the Investment started paying the required dividend — in the form of an unequivocal commitment from Yangon to allow UN supervision and monitoring of the repatriation and resettlement process. Yangon's professed "eagerness" to take the refugees back may well be a genuine one. but given the reality on the ground, mere eagerness is nowhere near enough to solve the problem.