Summary
An investigation by Times of Bangladesh documents harrowing testimonies of Rohingya survivors from Htan Shauk Khan village, Rakhine State, who accuse the Arakan Army of mass killings, arson, and sexual violence.
Eyewitnesses recount executions, children thrown into water, and bodies burned in piles. Human Rights Watch and Fortify Rights corroborate patterns of atrocities.
Since early 2024, over 150,000 Rohingya have fled to Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, amid collapsing humanitarian aid and overcrowded camps. UNHCR warns of a looming funding crisis. While Dhaka pushes for returns, rights groups caution against premature repatriation without accountability or safe conditions.
Context
The Rohingya crisis enters a new phase as the Arakan Army (AA)—once seen as a counterweight to Myanmar’s military junta—faces mounting accusations of atrocities against Rohingya civilians. Survivors’ testimonies collected by Times of Bangladesh align with investigations by Fortify Rights and Human Rights Watch, which describe mass killings, sexual violence, and intimidation campaigns in northern Rakhine.
This comes amid shifting geopolitics: the AA now controls up to 90% of Rakhine, while Bangladesh struggles with more than 1 million Rohingya in Cox’s Bazar camps. UNHCR reports that between April and August 2025 alone, 53,000 new arrivals crossed into Bangladesh, deepening an aid crisis already worsened by cuts to U.S. funding under former President Trump in 2024.
While Dhaka’s envoys promote the idea of “safe and dignified return,” rights groups warn of coercion and repeat cycles of violence. Amnesty and HRW stress that conditions in Rakhine remain hostile, with mass graves, displacement, and systemic discrimination continuing. The international spotlight, rekindled by a UN conference in September 2025, underscores both the urgency of accountability and the fragility of current solutions.
Editorial Intelligence Report
- Editorial Angle
- Source Credibility
- Ideological Leaning
- Sentiment
- Balance of Reporting
- Primary Sources Used
- Tone & Language
- Headline Accuracy
- International Relevance
- Watch Points (Bias/Risk)
Investigative and victim-centered: strong emphasis on survivor testimony and corroboration by rights groups.
Medium–High: Times of Bangladesh is relatively new and less established globally, but its investigative reporting is supported by HRW and Fortify Rights, lending credibility.
Neutral with a Human Rights focus: The reporting centers on human rights violations rather than a specific political ideology, though its advocacy for the Rohingya positions it within a human rights framework.
Negative/Alarmist — emotionally charged, focused on atrocities and humanitarian collapse.
Partially balanced: The narrative is powerfully built from victim testimony and human rights groups. The AA is offered a right of reply but does not provide one, leaving its perspective absent from the report.
Eyewitness survivors, NGOs (HRW, Fortify Rights), visual evidence (videos/photos), UNHCR data, Bangladeshi official statement.
Formal but emotive, incorporating graphic detail of killings to underscore severity.
Reflects content accurately; no exaggeration, though emotionally evocative.
High. The crisis intersects with global refugee policy, U.S. aid cuts, UN human rights debates, and Bangladesh–Myanmar relations.
- Heavy reliance on traumatic survivor testimony, which is powerful but can be challenged in legal settings without forensic corroboration
- Risk of emotional framing overshadowing geopolitical analysis of the AA’s motives
- The report presents a compelling case, but limited independent verification inside Rakhine.
Business Implications
Humanitarian Burden: Bangladesh faces rising costs and donor fatigue. Cuts to U.S. aid intensify resource shortfalls, threatening stability in Cox’s Bazar.
Repatriation Risks: Premature returns, if forced, could create another cycle of exodus, undermining Bangladesh’s credibility and straining relations with rights groups and Western partners.
Regional Geopolitics: China and India’s ties with the AA and Myanmar junta complicate accountability. For businesses and donors, this may signal policy volatility in aid and investment in border zones.
Diplomacy: With the AA’s consolidation of power in Rakhine and its alleged targeting of Rohingya, Dhaka’s diplomatic strategy, previously focused on the Myanmar junta, must now adapt to a de facto AA administration, complicating repatriation talks.
Reputational & Compliance Risk for Corporations: Any business with interests or supply chains linked to Rakhine State faces heightened ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) risks and must conduct enhanced due diligence to avoid association with human rights abuses.
Potential Angles to Monitor
- Survivor Documentation: Interview Shamsul and others who gathered video evidence; explore authenticity, risks, and motivations.
- AA Political Wing: Seek comment from United League of Arakan representatives on allegations of massacres.
- Humanitarian Aid Crisis: Interviews with UNHCR Bangladesh, WFP, and NGOs on resource gaps after U.S. aid suspension.
- Bangladesh Diplomacy: Talk to Bangladesh’s envoy Khalilur Rahman on Dhaka’s repatriation push vs. rights groups’ warnings.
- Accountability Mechanisms: Speak to ICC or UN human rights investigators on whether cases can be opened against AA commanders.
Frequently Asked Questions
Additional Reading:
Human Rights Watch – Myanmar: Arakan Army Oppresses Rohingya Muslims
Amnesty International – Myanmar: Rohingya repatriation ‘catastrophic’ under existing conditions in northern Rakhine State
UN’s OHCHR – High Commissioner Türk to Rohingya Conference: The international community must honour its responsibilities and act
FortifyRights – International Criminal Court: Investigate Arakan Army War Crimes Against Rohingya
The Irrawaddy – Rakhine’s Arakan Army Accused of Grave Abuses Against Rohingya