The people of Rakhine State are enduring a turbulent time, trapped in a relentless war between the Arakan Army (AA) and Myanmar’s Junta. With no end in sight, civilians remain engulfed in conflict, facing a dire humanitarian crisis that shows no sign of easing.
Thousands are suffering due to a severe shortage of food, medicine, and safe shelter. To end up this crisis, United Nations has urged Bangladesh to allow emergency relief aid to be sent to Rakhine through its territory.
Following which on April 27, Foreign Affairs Adviser Md. Touhid Hossain in a briefing said that Bangladesh has agreed in principle to allow a "humanitarian corridor" for the delivery of aid in Rakhine, under certain conditions.
His comments sparked confusion and debate within the country, with many unsure about the scope and implications of such a move.
Since then, the interim government has clarified that no formal discussion regarding a “humanitarian corridor” has taken place. Instead, Bangladesh has agreed to explore the creation of a limited-scale “relief channel” to deliver aid to the border region at the request of the United Nations.
National Security Adviser and Special Representative on Rohingya Affairs, Dr. Khalilur Rahman, on Wednesday reiterated that no conversations have occurred concerning a humanitarian corridor. Rather, discussions with the UN have been about creating a "humanitarian channel" to transport relief goods—though no final decision has yet been reached.
Difference between Humanitarian Corridor and Relief Channel
Dr. Khalilur Rahman clarified the distinction: “Corridor and channel are not the same. We’ve been discussing a relief channel to send aid to Rakhine, which would operate under UN supervision.”
According to International Committee of the Red Cross is humanitarian corridors or safe passages are essentially agreements between parties to the armed conflict to allow for safe passage for a limited time in a specific geographic area. They can allow civilians to leave, humanitarian assistance to come in or allow for the evacuation of the wounded, sick or dead.
The Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) notes that Humanitarian Corridor under international humanitarian law, are commonly understood as temporary, negotiated arrangements that enable the safe passage of civilians and humanitarian aid during conflicts.
On the other hand, a “relief channel” refers to a logistical arrangement conducted under specific conditions and oversight, without implying military or territorial access.
No deal signed on Humanitarian Corridor
National Security Adviser Khalilur Rahman said that the government has not signed any agreement or understanding over ‘Humanitarian Corridor’ to Myanmar.
Khalilur Rahman said nothing else just a primary discussion was held regarding ‘Humanitarian Corridor’ to Myanmar for the delivery of relief to Myanmar's Rakhine.
He made these remarks in a seminar organized at the Bangladesh University of Professionals (BUP) on issue of Rohingya repatriation on May 4.
Reactions of the political parties
The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) is viewing the interim government’s stance on issues like providing a humanitarian corridor to Myanmar, managing Chittagong port with ’suspicion’.
BNP’s Acting Chairman, Tarique Rahman, said: “The government wants to give Myanmar a humanitarian corridor and hand over the responsibility of managing Chittagong port to foreigners. Their actions indicate that this is a higher priority for them. This government has no right to make such decisions.”
BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir said, “This is a very serious matter involving our sovereignty and future regional stability. Such decisions should be made after discussing with all the political party, no secretly,”
Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami also expressed its concerns about the humanitarian corridor. The party said in a statement that if the army enters or the Rohingya enter in the name of the humanitarian corridor, Bangladesh will face a dire situation.
Reason Humanitarian Corridors are risk
In March 2022, Ukraine and Russia agreed to establish humanitarian corridors. However, in reality, their implementation was limited. The schedules for using the corridors were often announced at the last moment, preventing many civilians from taking advantage of them.
In particular, civilians in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions faced obstacles at checkpoints. Alongside uncertainty and long waits regarding corridor approvals, some convoys were also targeted by missile strikes.
Security analysts have warned that under the guise of humanitarian corridors, weapons or drugs could be trafficked—posing a threat to Bangladesh’s national security. They also noted that setting up corridors in the conflict-ridden Rakhine region could unintentionally entangle Bangladesh in Myanmar’s internal conflict.
In an interview with Banglanews, researcher, academic, and political analyst Professor Nazmul Ahsan Kalimullah said this is a highly sensitive matter. From a policy perspective, Bangladesh would be obliged to shelter the Rohingyas.
When asked who might benefit from the establishment of such corridors—the Arakan Army, the Rohingya community, or the Myanmar government—he responded that, overall, it would be the indigenous communities residing in Arakan Army-controlled areas and the Arakan Army itself.
The Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) states that humanitarian corridors often have limited security and access. In conflict zones, reaching designated humanitarian corridors safely can be extremely difficult for aid workers and civilians alike.
MSK/SMS
