Abstract

This article critically explores the proposed establishment of a humanitarian corridor in Myanmar’s Rakhine State, a region marked by ongoing ethnic conflict and forced displacement, particularly affecting the Rohingya minority. Framing the corridor within the complex interplay of regional security, migration governance, and national sovereignty, the paper evaluates both its humanitarian necessity and its geopolitical implications. While such a corridor could facilitate vital aid delivery, support voluntary refugee repatriation, and grant humanitarian actors access, it also raises substantial risks, ranging from militarization and regional power friction to potential violations of Myanmar’s sovereignty. Drawing from international legal norms and recent case studies, the article emphasizes the need for a multilateral, diplomatically negotiated, and conflict-sensitive framework. It concludes by advocating for a corridor that is not merely a logistical passage, but a symbol of inclusive, rights-based peacebuilding.

Key words: Humanitarian corridor, Regional security, Sovereignty, Migration, Coordination, Conflict, Peacebuilding and Refugees. 

Introduction

A humanitarian corridor is a type of short-term demilitarized area designed to ensure safety for refugees leaving a crisis zone and for humanitarian aid entering. A no-fly or no-drive zone may also be associated with such a corridor. In the post-Cold War era, various "humanitarian corridors" have been proposed by the international community during humanitarian interventions or by one or more of the warring parties. The Syrian Civil War witnessed widespread use of humanitarian corridors. *McQueen (2016)

The establishment of humanitarian corridors has become a crucial, if contentious, tool of international crisis management in a world that is becoming more interconnected yet still prone to war. These safe passageways or demilitarised areas make it easier for humanitarian workers, refugees, and civilians to travel through areas of conflict. The situation in Myanmar's Rakhine State makes the need for such a mechanism more urgent and intricate than anywhere else. The construction of a humanitarian corridor into Rakhine has received new momentum as regional instability, forced displacement, and ethnic tensions escalate.

The consequences of creating a humanitarian corridor in Rakhine are examined in this article from the perspectives of three interrelated areas: regional security, migratory control and national sovereignty preservation. It makes the case that although the corridor might offer temporary humanitarian assistance, it also presents serious long-term geopolitical and governance issues that need to be properly handled.

The Humanitarian Imperative in Rakhine

Rakhine State, home to the persecuted Rohingya minority, has witnessed decades of ethnic strife and systemic discrimination. The humanitarian situation in Myanmar worsened after the military crackdown in 2017 and the coup in 2021. *Garrido (2022). While thousands of Rohingya are still internally displaced in Myanmar, over a million have fled to Bangladesh. A humanitarian corridor might provide a practical way to provide life-saving assistance and make it easier for refugees to return home voluntarily, safely, and with dignity. Additionally, it might give foreign players like the United Nations (UN), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) a legitimate avenue to function in a highly militarised and politically delicate setting.

Figure 1: The proposed humanitarian corridor between Bangladesh and Myanmar is depicted on a map, highlighting the states of Cox'sbazar in Bangladesh and Rakhine in Myanmar.

However, history indicates that in the absence of strong control, humanitarian corridors run the risk of becoming militarised, being appropriated by state or non-state entities, or failing completely as a result of inadequate coordination and local opposition. Any such endeavour must therefore be incorporated into a multilateral framework based on conflict sensitivity and humanitarian neutrality.

Regional Security: Stability or Spillover?

It is impossible to overstate the significance of a humanitarian corridor in Rakhine for regional security. India, China, Bangladesh, Laos, and Thailand are all neighbours of Myanmar and have an interest in maintaining its internal stability. Implementing any corridor is extremely risky due to the existence of armed groups like the Arakan Army (AA) and the continuous fighting between ethnic armed groups and the Myanmar military (Tatmadaw). Corridors are at serious risk of becoming weaponised, either as a logistical route for rebels or as a tactical buffer by the Tatmadaw. *Arduino and Gong (2019).

Moreover, concerns over the safety and neutrality of foreign assistance workers are also raised by their proximity to areas of ongoing conflict. Errors could lead to hostilities or attacks, raising tensions and threatening the credibility of global aid initiatives. From a more comprehensive strategic perspective, Rakhine is viewed via economic and security lenses by regional powers such as China and India. Infrastructure developments in Rakhine are part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and Beijing is doubtful of any military or diplomatic engagement in this area. India views the unrest in Rakhine as a danger to its northeast and a possible catalyst for militancy beyond international borders.

In order to prevent the corridor from unintentionally turning into a hot spot for regional rivalry, any humanitarian action must take these sensitivities into consideration.

Migration Flows: Repatriation, Refuge, and Responsibility

The migratory dilemma is at the core of the Rakhine conflict. The humanitarian consequences have been most severe in Bangladesh, the primary host nation for the Rohingya refugees. *Hoque (2021). Dhaka has frequently demanded foreign aid and long-term repatriation procedures because there are more than a million Rohingya in Cox’s Bazar alone.

Theoretically, a properly run humanitarian corridor may make it easier for refugees to return voluntarily and safely. Along the Myanmar-Bangladesh border, it might also aid in the decongestion of overcrowded refugee camps and the restoration of some stability. However, the requirements for repatriation continue to raise questions. Repatriation has the risk of becoming forced or symbolic in the absence of assurance of citizenship. Safety and access to livelihoods. Furthermore, returns must be voluntary and informed, as required by international refugee law. The requirement is challenging to achieve in Myanmar’s opaque post-coup atmosphere. 

At the same time, the corridor must not turn into a route for human trafficking or unauthorised migration. Inadequate control runs the risk of allowing criminal networks to take advantage of the system, putting vulnerable groups at even greater risk and upsetting host communities. Therefore, regional coordination, strong monitoring systems, and more extensive policy reforms in Myanmar must all be directly related to the management of migration through a humanitarian corridor.

National Sovereignty: Between Protection and Perception

The question of national sovereignty is arguably the most difficult. Citing dangers to its sovereignty and territorial integrity, Myanmar’s military government has always opposed outside intervention in its internal affairs. *Matelski (2025). The creation of a humanitarian corridor could be viewed as a violation of state authority, particularly if it involves foreign parties or international supervision. Myanmar is hardly the only country with such views. Because the regimes in Syria, Sudan, and Ethiopia saw humanitarian corridors as stepping stones to foreign involvement or regime change, sovereignty concerns have blocked or impeded them.

This needs to be addressed by framing the corridor as a device that promotes cooperation rather than coercion. Despite its weak enforcement capabilities, ASEAN may be crucial in negotiating access and obtaining political support. Phased deployment or collaborative monitoring teams are two examples of confidence-building strategies that could reassure Myanmar’s government. The international world needs to understand that humanitarianism and sovereignty are not incompatible. A politically sensitive, locally owned, and diplomatically negotiated corridor has a higher chance of being accepted and working. *(“Complexity, Security and Civil Society in East Asia,” 2015)

Legal and Normative Frameworks

The success of a humanitarian corridor in Rakhine also depends on its compliance with international legal and normative standards. Key principles include:

• Humanitarian neutrality and impartiality
• Consent of the affected state
• Voluntary return of displaced persons
• Protection of civilians and aid workers

The creation of corridors in conflict situations is supported by international law, particularly the Geneva Conventions and customary humanitarian principles. *Nagle (2013). However, proper security guarantees, logistical viability and political will are necessary for implementation. Furthermore, accountability must be considered when designing the corridor. To prevent the corridor from serving as a haven for impunity, any human rights abuse by state troops or non-state actors must be reported and dealt with.

Conclusion: Navigating a Triple Nexus

In order to alleviate human suffering, stabilize a volatile region and reaffirm international commitment to human rights, a humanitarian corridor to Rakhine offers a unique but precarious chance. However, it is situated at the meeting point of three strong currents: regional security, migratory governance and national sovereignty.

To navigate this triple nexus, stakeholders must pursue a multi-pronged strategy:

1. Engage regional actors such as ASEAN, India, and China in shaping and supporting the corridor.
2. Establish transparent monitoring and legal safeguards to prevent misuse.
3. Ensure refugee agency and dignity in all repatriation and assistance plans.
4. Uphold Myanmar's sovereignty through collaborative, not coercive, diplomatic channels.

Finally, the humanitarian corridor must serve as a symbol and instrument of inclusive and sustainable peacebuilding rather than just a route for supplies. It could open the door for a new regional ethic of accountability and resilience in addition to humanitarian aid in Rakhine if it is carried out with caution, bravery and collaboration.  

Muhammad Alamghir, PPM, is a law enforcement professional with over 24 years of experience in the Bangladesh Police, including more than three years in United Nations peacekeeping missions in Timor-Leste, Darfur, and South Sudan. He is well-known for his commitment to public service and has served in a variety of operational, administrative, and investigative capacities within district and metropolitan jurisdictions, including Officer-in-Charge, Police Inspector, Academic Instructor, Court Inspector, and Crime Analyst. Alamghir holds two master's degrees: one in Peace, Conflict, and Human Rights, and another in Criminology and Criminal Justice. He is recognized for his contributions with prestigious awards such as the President Police Medal (PPM) and multiple UN Peace Medals, along with expertise in international and regional security, migration, and counterterrorism. He is multilingual, tech-savvy, and actively engaged in social initiatives and community leadership. 

Reference:

* McQueen, C. (2016). Humanitarian intervention and safety zones: Iraq, Bosnia and Rwanda. Springer.

* Garrido, C. R. (2022). The State-Sponsored Genocide of the Rohingya Community from a Constructivist Perspective. Comillas Journal of International Relations, 24, 52–70. https://doi.org/10.14422/cir.i24.y2022.004

* Arduino, A., & Gong, X. (2019). Securing the Belt and Road initiative: Risk Assessment, Private Security and Special Insurances Along the New Wave of Chinese Outbound Investments. Red Globe Press.

* Hoque, M. M. (2021). Forced Labour and access to Education of Rohingya Refugee Children in Bangladesh: Beyond a Humanitarian Crisis. Journal of Modern Slavery, 6(3), 20–35. https://doi.org/10.22150/jms/ppjy4309

* Matelski, M. (2025). Contested civil society in Myanmar: Local Change and Global Recognition. Policy Press.

* Complexity, security and civil society in East Asia. (2015). In Open Book Publishers. https://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0059

* Nagle, L. E. (2013). How conflict and displacement fuel human trafficking and abuse of vulnerable groups. The case of Colombia and opportunities for real action and innovative solutions. Groningen Journal of International Law, 1(2),  https://doi.org/10.21827/5a86a75a7c5c9