In Myanmar, there is great discrimination against the ethnic Rohingya. The Rohingya are an ethnic minority whose citizenship is not recognized by the Myanmar government. They are treated like illegal immigrants and are subjected to constant violence by Myanmar’s military and security forces. The Rohingya ethnic group experienced serious human rights violations where many of them were killed and their homes destroyed, so they had to flee to a safer place. Myanmar, which was formerly known as Burma, is a country whose population is dominated by descendants of the Buddhist Mongol race. Discrimination against the Rohingya ethnic group has a long history, starting in 1962 under the leadership of President U Nay Win. At that time, the president carried out several actions aimed at forcibly expelling the Rohingya ethnic group from Myanmar, these actions included extra judicial killings, arbitrary arrests, property expropriation, rape, anti-Rohingya and anti-Muslim propaganda, forced labor, restrictions on employment, and prohibition of religious practice. Then in 1982 the Myanmar Citizenship Law (Burma Citizenship Law 1982) was issued. It removed the Rohingya ethnicity from the list of recognized ethnicities in Myanmar, both in the main ethnic category which contains eight ethnic groups and the minor ethnic category which contains one hundred and thirty-five minor ethnic groups of Myanmar. For Myanmar, the Rohingya ethnicity is an ethnic Bengali or ethnic Bangladeshi who illegally entered Myanmar’s territory (Mangku, 2021). The absence of citizenship marks the absence of legal guarantees for the fulfillment of basic rights. The Rohingya people have lost access to health, employment and formal education.

The beginning of the discrimination faced by the Rohingya Muslims can be traced back to the British occupation of Myanmar in 1824. At that time, the Rohingya loyally supported the British. On the other hand, the Myanmar nationalist camp sided with Japan. It is because of these differences that the Myanmar government, until now, considers the Rohingya ethnic group has hampered the struggle for Myanmar’s independence and refused to grant them citizenship status. Nationalist groups along with Buddhists think that the Rohingya have received many benefits from the British government, which has fueled hatred against the Rohingya (Setiawan & Suryanti, 2021). In June 2012, the government of Myanmar destroyed and burned almost all the mosques in the capital city of Arakan. In addition, many madrassas were also closed. The freedom of the Rohingya Muslims to carry out their worship is revoked. If they are caught praying, it means they are subject to punishment (Mangku, 2021). From October 2016 to August 2017, the Myanmar military carried out a massive military operation in Rakhine, an area inhabited by ethnic Rohingya. This operation is considered as Myanmar’s systematic effort to erase the ethnic identity of the Rohingya and eliminate them from Myanmar. This was done through mass killings, rape and burning of their homes. No less than 700,000 Rohingya fled to neighboring countries during the military operation (BBC, 2019).

Indonesia began welcoming Rohingya refugees in 2009. In that year, 391 Rohingya refugees came to Indonesia. In 2015, there were 792 Rohingya refugees living in Indonesia. Some of them were accommodated by Indonesia Immigration Detention Centers (Rudenim) that located in Belawan, Tanjung Pinang and Manado, while some others were facilitated by the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and lived spread across several cities such as Bogor, Jakarta, Makassar and Medan (Budaya, 2017). As of February 2023, according to UNHCR data, there were 1,161 refugees from Myanmar in Indonesia. Refugees from Myanmar are the third largest number of refugees in Indonesia after refugees from Afghanistan and Somalia (UNHCR, 2023).

In analyzing Indonesia’s response to the Rohingya refugee crisis, two concepts will be used, namely moral cosmopolitanism and political cosmopolitanism. In simple terms, moral cosmopolitanism is respect for fellow human beings. This type of cosmopolitanism views that all people have the same right, regardless of their identity; nationality, race, religion, class and others. Humans are universal beings and all are citizens of the world. Moral cosmopolitanism underlines the equal moral status of individuals and obliges us to consider the good of all human beings in our actions (Nussbaum, 1997). Therefore, moral cosmopolitanism focuses on recognizing and protecting basic human rights. Basic human rights and human welfare, including the right to be free from torture, the right to be free from discrimination, and the right to livelihood resources, must be protected (Buchanan, 2004). In moral cosmopolitanism, we have a moral burden that comes from the heart to help the poor, sick and hungry around the world (not limited to geographical location, closeness of kinship, ethnic differences and others). The real manifestation of moral cosmopolitanism is humanitarian assistance provided by individuals directly or through certain institutions.

Political cosmopolitanism or some call it ‘legal cosmopolitanism’ is an extension of moral cosmopolitanism in which the spirit of human equality is manifested in a commitment to certain policies. Out of this cosmopolitanism emerged the concept of a ‘world state’ which includes all human beings, which weighed heavily on the focus on ‘world citizenship’. Basically, the world state is still the ideal for political cosmopolitanism, or it can be said as a mega project that still has a very long way to go to be realized. Before arriving at the stage of the formation of a world state, a more practical application of political cosmopolitanism is the formation of global governance institutions that carry the values of justice and human equality, and the support for open borders (Etinson, 2010).

In terms of moral cosmopolitanism, Indonesia has done many things to help the Rohingya people affected by the conflict in Myanmar. Humanitarian aid is frequently sent by Indonesia for Rohingya refugees, for example in 2017 when Indonesia sent 30 tons of rice, 14,000 blankets, 2,004 ready-to-eat food packages, 20 units of large tents, 10 units of flexible water tanks, 900 packages of clothing and one ton of sugar to the Rohingya refugee camps in Bangladesh (BBC, 2017). Indonesia has also built a hospital in Rakhine State. Rumah Sakit Bantuan Indonesia (Indonesian Assistance Hospital) is precisely located in Myaung Bwe, Mrauk U, Rakhine State. The construction of this hospital lasted for two years and was handed over technically to the government of Myanmar in 2019. Apart from being a symbol of friendship between Indonesia and Myanmar, this hospital is also expected to promote peace in the conflict area of Rakhine State. It is hoped that this hospital can be utilized by both Muslim and Buddhist in Myanmar. This hospital is funded by the Indonesian government, the Indonesian people, the Indonesian Muslim community, and the Indonesian Buddhist community especially WALUBI or Indonesian Buddhist Representatives (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Indonesia, 2019). This hospital is a reflection of Indonesia’s moral cosmopolitanism; providing inclusive humanitarian assistance regardless of differences in ethnicity, religion and other backgrounds. Indonesia, represented by Mrs. Retno Marsuadi as the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Indonesia, is also consistently involved in intensive communication with Myanmar and other parties such as the United Nations to encourage an end to human rights violations that is occurring in Myanmar.

The value of moral cosmopolitanism is also carried out by the people of Aceh. Aceh is the entry point for Rohingya refugees in Indonesia. Since 2015, Rohingya refugees arriving by boats have been rescued and assisted by local fishermen even though they were ordered not to get involved by the authorities. However, fishermen continue to search for Rohingya refugee boats based on humanitarian reasons (VOA, 2015).

Although Indonesia implements the values of moral cosmopolitanism very well, Indonesia has not been able to implement the values of political cosmopolitanism due to several limitations. Indonesia cannot be said to support open borders because it has not ratified the Refugee Convention 1951 and the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugee (1967 Protocol). Thus, legally Indonesia does not have to be responsible for the problem of refugees and has the status of a transit country for refugees, including Rohingya refugees. In 2010, the Indonesian Directorate General of Immigration issued a policy stating that Rohingya refugees were categorized as illegal immigrants, but they were allowed to settle in Indonesia temporarily on condition that they must be recognized as refugees by UNHCR (Crock, 2014). This policy was later strengthened by Presidential Regulation no. 125 of 2016. This regulation confirms Indonesia’s willingness to temporarily  accommodate refugees. It also contains national standards for the treatment of refugees in Indonesia. Article 2 of this regulation stated that the handling of refugees is carried out based on cooperation between the central government and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Indonesia and/or international organizations.

The Indonesian government has several reasons for not ratifying the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol regarding refugees. There are several provisions in the 1951 Convention which are considered quite difficult and are still not possible for Indonesia to carry out at this time. For example, Articles 13, 14 and 30 oblige the state to facilitate the transfer of refugees’ property and assets; Articles 17, 18 and 19 allow refugees to get paid work, they are also allowed to establish private company; Article 22 oblige the state to give of the right to education for refugees; Articles 21 and 24 oblige the state to provide welfare rights for refugees in the form of housing and allowances (Liliansa & Jayadi, 2015). These articles are a dilemma for the Indonesian government because they can create gaps for Indonesian citizens. The Indonesian government is still trying to ensure its own citizens have enough jobs and have equitable access to education.

Indonesia is a country that has high concern for humanitarian issues. Indonesia keeps an eye for communities in other countries whose human rights are suppressed, including the Rohingya ethnic group. Indonesia, both the government and its citizens, implements cosmopolitan moral values. However, Indonesia still has not implemented political cosmopolitanism because there is a dilemma regarding the priority of the welfare of its own citizens which may clash if the state fulfills the welfare of refugees. The same dilemma is also felt by other countries in the world, even countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention so they have a tendency to close their borders or tighten the requirements for the entry of refugees into their territory. This makes the refugee problem complex; refugees in any part of the world are like floating objects because their basic rights are generally not fulfilled in transit countries and can only depend on philanthropy, which is very far from the idea of cosmopolitanism, both moral and political. The most important thing is to solve the problem from its root; stop conflicts that force refugees to move to safer places. A ‘world state’ does not have to be formed slowly from open borders because countries have to accept refugees. A world state should be formed naturally as a result of globalization, without people who need to enter an area because they are escaping from torture.