This chapter intends to understand the meaning of ‘home’ for the Rohingyas. Legally, they have been non-citizens of Myanmar since the 1980s. However, they lived in Arakan in their houses and surroundings, shared by their family and neighbours, Rohingyas and Rakhines. The central question sought in their narratives is: has Myanmar ever turned into a ‘home’ for them? Rakhines are the significant ‘others’, and they dishonoured Rohingyas. Rohingyas experienced severe ill-treatment to get what they were entitled to as citizens of Myanmar. Authorities do not like Rohingyas who disobey their instructions; they would have to pay a monetary fine or get beaten by uniformed security forces. Prayers and Azan, religious practices, were also prohibited. The physical oppression from the state and military, and legal deprivation as citizens, would have constructed their idea of ‘home’ in Myanmar. Do they envisage their future homes in Myanmar, or can they differentiate between ‘home’ and the ‘state’? The personal narratives of camp-based Rohingyas on their ideas of ‘home’ in Myanmar demonstrate the features of statelessness vis-à-vis homelessness and the treatment by the mighty state towards them. This chapter includes fifty micro-narratives (or life stories) of Cox’s Bazar camp-based Rohingyas to understand their ideas of ‘home’ and ‘state’.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Rethinking Home from the Experience of Home[state]lessness: The Discursive Exposé of Rohingya Narratives from Cox’s Bazar Camps

  • Niloy Ranjan Biswas

摘要

This chapter intends to understand the meaning of ‘home’ for the Rohingyas. Legally, they have been non-citizens of Myanmar since the 1980s. However, they lived in Arakan in their houses and surroundings, shared by their family and neighbours, Rohingyas and Rakhines. The central question sought in their narratives is: has Myanmar ever turned into a ‘home’ for them? Rakhines are the significant ‘others’, and they dishonoured Rohingyas. Rohingyas experienced severe ill-treatment to get what they were entitled to as citizens of Myanmar. Authorities do not like Rohingyas who disobey their instructions; they would have to pay a monetary fine or get beaten by uniformed security forces. Prayers and Azan, religious practices, were also prohibited. The physical oppression from the state and military, and legal deprivation as citizens, would have constructed their idea of ‘home’ in Myanmar. Do they envisage their future homes in Myanmar, or can they differentiate between ‘home’ and the ‘state’? The personal narratives of camp-based Rohingyas on their ideas of ‘home’ in Myanmar demonstrate the features of statelessness vis-à-vis homelessness and the treatment by the mighty state towards them. This chapter includes fifty micro-narratives (or life stories) of Cox’s Bazar camp-based Rohingyas to understand their ideas of ‘home’ and ‘state’.