Bangladesh now needs to ensure that “repatriation” does not become another diplomatic slogan. UNGA 81 must lead to something measurable: funded, monitored and politically backed steps that transform repeated promises into a safe pathway home.
After nearly a decade of sheltering more than 1.2 million Rohingya refugees, Bangladesh went to the 81st United Nations General Assembly with a message sharper than its traditional appeal for humanitarian assistance: the time for sympathy is over; the international community must act.
Prime Minister Tarique Rahman used a high-level Rohingya side event at UN headquarters on September 23 to explicitly call for a shift “from empathy to a search for root causes and their solutions, from promises to action and from managing displacement to ending it.” That formulation captures the central dilemma facing Bangladesh.
The country has received international praise for opening its borders to people fleeing violence in Myanmar. It has hosted the world’s largest refugee population in a single operation for nearly nine years. Yet there is still no large-scale repatriation, humanitarian funding is declining, and conditions inside Myanmar remain deeply unstable.
Bangladesh’s challenge at UNGA 81, therefore, was not simply to make the world remember the Rohingya crisis. It was to persuade major powers and international institutions to do something measurable about it.
From sympathy to a five-point demand
Tarique Rahman placed five concrete demands before the international community.
First, Bangladesh wants a clear and credible roadmap for early, safe, voluntary, dignified and sustainable repatriation.
Second, it wants an end to violence against civilians, including Rohingya, and guarantees of their fundamental rights and security.
Third, it called for adequate and predictable humanitarian assistance for refugees and Bangladeshi host communities.
Fourth, Bangladesh demanded stronger justice and accountability.
And fifth, it called for greater regional and international cooperation against trafficking, narcotics, illegal arms, digital scams and other transnational crimes.
The significance of the proposal is that it attempts to connect issues that have often been treated separately.
Bangladesh does not want humanitarian funding to disappear. But neither does it want humanitarian assistance to become a permanent substitute for a political solution.
“We need their support more than ever,” Tarique Rahman said while warning that humanitarian generosity could not become an excuse for political inaction and that Bangladesh could not be expected to shoulder the responsibility indefinitely.
That is a considerably more assertive diplomatic position than simply asking donors to fund the camps.
The central demand: make return possible
At the General Debate on September 24, Tarique Rahman made the objective even clearer, saying the only solution to the crisis is the safe return of the displaced Rohingya to their homeland in Myanmar.
He stressed that Bangladesh has been hosting more than 1.2 million forcibly displaced Rohingya for more than nine years and argued that because the crisis originated in Myanmar, its solution must also be found there. This is the core of Bangladesh’s diplomatic strategy.
Dhaka is effectively telling the international community that the question should no longer be how long Bangladesh can continue hosting the refugees, but what the international community is prepared to do to make their safe return possible.
That requires pressure on Myanmar, but also engagement with the changing political and security realities inside Rakhine State.
A repatriation agreement signed in distant Naypyidaw will have limited meaning if the authorities controlling the areas to which refugees return cannot or will not guarantee their security.
Bangladesh therefore needs an international mechanism that goes beyond another bilateral agreement: one involving security guarantees, rights, humanitarian access, independent monitoring and meaningful participation of the Rohingya themselves.
The funding crisis exposes the limits of international solidarity
The strongest evidence that sympathy has not translated sufficiently into action is the funding situation.
The UN and its partners appealed for $710.5 million in 2026 to meet critical needs of Rohingya refugees in Cox’s Bazar and Bhasan Char and those of Bangladeshi host communities. The appeal came as humanitarian needs increased while global funding became increasingly constrained. Nearly 1.2 million Rohingya are currently living in Bangladesh, with additional arrivals driven by continuing conflict in Myanmar.
Bangladesh has increasingly argued that international support must cover not only the refugees but also the communities that have absorbed the consequences of the crisis.
This is particularly important for Cox’s Bazar, where the prolonged refugee presence has placed pressure on local infrastructure, employment, natural resources and public services.
The financial question is therefore not simply humanitarian. It is also a question of burden-sharing.
Bangladesh has provided the territory, security and administrative infrastructure. International donors provide much of the humanitarian financing. Myanmar, where the crisis originated, remains the country to which the refugees are expected to return. But the imbalance remains: Bangladesh continues to bear substantial direct and indirect costs while international funding faces competing global crises.
Bangladesh has stepped up efforts at UNGA 81 to secure stronger international support for more than 1.2 million Rohingya refugees amid declining humanitarian funding. At a September 24 Manhattan meeting organised by Human Concern USA, State Minister M. Iqbal Hossain and RRRC Commissioner M. Mizanur Rahman urged sustained global assistance, while stressing that humanitarian support must remain linked to the ultimate goal of safe, voluntary and dignified repatriation.
Bangladesh’s message gains support—but not yet a solution
The diplomatic environment at UNGA 81 was favourable to Bangladesh’s argument. UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy on Myanmar Julie Bishop thanked Bangladesh for its leadership and highlighted the continuing plight of more than 1.2 million Rohingya. She pointed to the extraordinary responsibility Bangladesh has carried since the mass displacement of 2017.
The President of the 81st General Assembly, Khalilur Rahman, also met Bishop before the side event. Their discussions covered the humanitarian situation, the Rohingya in Cox’s Bazar and the need to address the root causes of the crisis so that return can eventually take place.
The September 23 high-level event itself brought together Bangladesh, The Gambia, the European Union and representatives of a wide range of countries and UN agencies.
This demonstrates that Bangladesh has been successful in maintaining a broad international coalition around the issue. But diplomatic visibility should not be confused with diplomatic success. The crucial question remains: What will the Bnagladesh governments actually do after leaving New York?
The Rohingya want return—but not at any price
There is another dimension Bangladesh’s diplomacy cannot afford to overlook: the voice of the Rohingya themselves. For many refugees, Bangladesh remains the country that provided safety when they had nowhere else to turn. But gratitude for that protection does not diminish their determination to return home. The Rohingya want to go back to Myanmar—but not simply to cross another border. They want to return with security, dignity, rights and a genuine stake in their future.
That means credible guarantees of legal status and citizenship rights, freedom of movement, protection from renewed violence, access to education and livelihoods, and safeguards for homes, land and property. The UN has repeatedly stressed that conditions for safe, voluntary, dignified and sustainable return are not yet in place. Any repatriation initiative must therefore address those conditions rather than treat physical return as an end in itself.
Rohingya representatives also insist that they must have a meaningful role in shaping the process. Speaking after a week of meetings during the 81st UN General Assembly in New York, Rohingya representative Lucky Karim said the community was too often excluded from decisions directly affecting its future. He said he helped organise a Rohingya-led dialogue through the Rohingya Consultative Council, bringing together experts with both professional and lived experience to discuss what a possible repatriation process could look like.
Karim also attended the September 23 Bangladesh-Gambia high-level side event on the Rohingya crisis and held bilateral meetings with governments and international actors supporting Rohingya rights and security. In a Facebook post, he stressed that political inclusion of the Rohingya would be essential to any democratic and sustainable future in Myanmar. “Conversations about us without us will only lead to a temporary change,” he wrote.
Other Rohingya representatives echoed the call for concrete action rather than another round of international assurances. United Council of Rohingya founding president Maulvi Said Ullah called for a clear, UN-backed and time-bound roadmap for safe, voluntary and dignified repatriation, saying Rohingyas could not remain indefinitely in refugee camps.
Rohingya leader Mohammad Rafiq likewise said the community had heard repeated international commitments on its right to return but remained trapped in prolonged displacement. He called for a “specific and time-bound roadmap” through the United Nations, with security, rights and dignity guaranteed.
Their message adds an important dimension to Bangladesh’s diplomatic push: repatriation cannot be only a state-to-state process. An agreement negotiated by governments may establish a framework on paper, but its sustainability will ultimately depend on whether the people expected to return believe the conditions are safe and their rights will be protected. For Bangladesh, therefore, the Rohingya voice is not simply a humanitarian consideration—it is central to building a credible and sustainable pathway to return.
Accountability cannot be sacrificed for expediency
Bangladesh has also insisted that justice and accountability remain part of any durable solution.That position is important because the causes of the Rohingya exodus cannot simply be separated from the question of their return.
The international accountability process, including proceedings concerning Myanmar, is lengthy and cannot by itself produce immediate security in Rakhine. But Bangladesh’s argument is that a sustainable return requires addressing the conditions that produced displacement. This also creates a difficult diplomatic balancing act.
Myanmar may resist international legal pressure while seeking greater international engagement. Bangladesh, meanwhile, needs cooperation from countries that have influence over Myanmar.
The challenge for Dhaka is therefore to pursue repatriation diplomacy without allowing the pursuit of a short-term agreement to weaken the broader principles of rights and accountability.
The crisis is becoming a regional security problem
Bangladesh’s decision to highlight trafficking, narcotics, illegal arms and digital scams is also significant. The longer the crisis remains unresolved, the greater the risk that desperation inside the camps and instability across the border will feed transnational criminal networks.
Tarique Rahman warned that people were already taking dangerous boat journeys towards Malaysia and that an unresolved crisis in one country could become a security challenge for an entire region.
This provides Bangladesh with another argument for international engagement.
The Rohingya crisis is no longer only about refugees and humanitarian agencies. It increasingly intersects with border security, maritime migration, organised crime and regional stability.
That should make the crisis harder—not easier—for major regional powers to ignore.
The real test begins after UNGA
Bangladesh leaves UNGA 81 with stronger international visibility and a clearer diplomatic message. But it has not yet secured the breakthrough it wants.
There is still no credible timetable for large-scale repatriation. Humanitarian financing remains under pressure. Conditions in Rakhine remain unsuitable for sustainable return. And Bangladesh still lacks a mechanism capable of ensuring that international commitments will translate into concrete pressure on Myanmar.
That is why the country’s next diplomatic phase matters more than the speeches in New York. Dhaka now needs to turn its five-point proposal into measurable demands with timelines, responsible actors and funding commitments.
It needs to press donors for predictable multi-year financing rather than annual emergency appeals. It needs a stronger international development package for Cox’s Bazar’s host communities. It needs meaningful Rohingya participation in any repatriation framework. And it needs international guarantees and monitoring mechanisms that remain in place after refugees cross back into Myanmar.
Most importantly, Bangladesh needs to ensure that the word “repatriation” does not become another diplomatic slogan. Nearly nine years after the 2017 exodus, the world already knows the Rohingya story. It knows Bangladesh has carried an enormous humanitarian burden. It knows Myanmar is the country of origin. It knows the refugees want to return when conditions permit. What is missing is action capable of changing those conditions. That is the message Bangladesh took to UNGA 81.
Not another expression of sympathy. Not another declaration of concern. But a funded, monitored and politically backed pathway from displacement to safe return.
Whether Bangladesh can turn that demand into such a mechanism will determine whether UNGA 81 becomes another chapter of international rhetoric—or the beginning of a more serious effort to end one of the world’s longest-running refugee crises.
