Global Overview 2015: People internally displaced by conflict and violence - South-east Asia

Figures and causes of displacement

There were 854,900 IDPs displaced by conflict and violence in south-east Asia as of the end of 2014, down four per cent from 887,000 a year earlier. The gentle decline reflects an overall trend in the region over the past decade. Around 134,000 people were newly displaced during the year, 65 per cent fewer than in 2013. This was mainly the result of a reduction in the number and intensity of violent incidents, particularly in Myanmar and the Philippines where the largest displacements have taken place in recent years.

Around 95 per cent of the region's IDPs are concentrated in three countries. Myanmar has 645,300, Indonesia at least 84,000 and the Philippines 77,700. There are thought to be around 35,000 people displaced in Thailand and 7,500 in Papua New Guinea. Displacement in Laos and Timor-Leste is small-scale but unresolved.

Gathering data on displacement presents a number of challenges across the region, mainly related to the lack of a common and standardised definition of what constitutes an IDP. Poor resources at the local level and limited access to some areas affected by violence also hamper the task. Data disaggregated by sex and age was only collected in Myanmar's Rakhine, Kachin and northern Shan states and to a lesser extent in the Philippines's city of Zamboanga.^[260] Elsewhere in the region the lack of such data was a barrier to providing an adequate response to the needs of the most vulnerable IDPs.

Fighting between government forces and NSAGs was the main cause of displacement in 2014, forcing people to flee their homes in Indonesia, Myanmar, the Philippines and southern Thailand. Inter-communal violence between ethnic and religious groups, often triggered by disputes over land and resources, also caused displacement in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea.

No new major armed conflicts flared up in the region. In the Philippines, the signing of the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro in March 2014 put an official end to 40 years of conflict between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) in Mindanao.

In many south-east Asian countries, displacement is multi-causal. Natural haz- ards, conflict and development projects combine to create not only an environment conducive to flight, but also conditions that increase IDPs' vulnerability and undermine their resilience. Millions of people in the region are displaced each year by disasters caused by natural hazards, but there is no data on the scale of displacement triggered by development projects.

New displacement and displacement patterns

Most new displacements in 2014 were short-term and IDPs returned home within a matter of days or weeks. The majority sought refuge with friends or family, but others went into hiding in the forest for fear of suffering abuses at the hands of military forces or NSAGs. Most stayed as close as possible to their homes so as to be able to return as soon as conditions allowed.

The Philippines accounted for the majority of new displacements. Around 124,000 people fled their homes to escape armed conflict, the main cause, and criminal and clan-related violence.^[261] IDPs were concentrated in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao. The largest displacement was caused by a military operation launched in early 2014 against the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters, a MILF breakaway group opposed to the peace process. Around 48,000 people were displaced in North Cotabato and Maguindanao provinces. Some left in anticipation of the violence, and others fled government air strikes and shelling. Most sought refuge with host families or built temporary shelters, though a smaller number made for governmentrun camps.^[262]

The largest new displacement in Myanmar took place in Kachin state in April, when government forces clashed with the Kachin Independence Army (KIA) near the border with China. The fighting lasted for a week and forced 2,700 people to flee, many of whom had been displaced by violence before. Some crossed the border into China, but most took shelter in camps within Kachin.^[263] Fighting between the military and the Democratic Karen Benevolent Army displaced another 2,000 people in the south-east of the country in October. Some sought refuge in nearby villages, but others went into hiding in the jungle to escape alleged violence and abuses by the military, including intimidation and forced labour.^[264]

The majority of those displaced by fighting between the Indonesian military and the Free Papua Movement (Organisasi Papua Merdeka) in Papua and West Papua provinces also fled into the forest, a pattern of displacement observed in previous years. They included those displaced by counter-insurgency operations in the Puncak Jaya region of Papua in January.^[265] Elsewhere in Indonesia, inter-communal violence continued to cause sporadic displacement. In August, 500 people were displaced when a longstanding land dispute between two villages in East Nusa Tenggara province turned violent.^[266] Most sought refuge in neighbouring villages.^[267]

Protection issues

Armed conflict and the excesses of both state forces and NSAGs put IDPs' lives and physical security at risk across the region in 2014. In Myanmar, IDPs in Kachin and northern Shan states faced threats from ongoing fighting, anti-personnel mines and UXO, human trafficking, forced recruitment and sexual violence.^[268] They also experienced harassment and interrogation in camps. In May, the military arrested 14 IDPs in Kachin on suspicion of being KIA members.^[269]

In the Philippines, indigenous people who fled the militarisation of their community in Mindanao's Agusan del Sur province in November said the military had harassed them in their camps and accused them of being members of the New People's Army.^[270]

IDPs in most of the region's displacement camps lacked access to basic necessities such as food, clean water and adequate sanitation facilities. Local authorities were only willing or able to provide basic relief on a temporary basis, and residents were often expected to return to their places of origin after a few weeks or months, or to find alternative solutions on their own. The living conditions of those who failed to do so deteriorated over time, and those belonging to ethnic or religious minorities were at risk of further marginalisation and vulnerability.

In July, the UN highlighted the "deplorable" living conditions in camps in Myanmar's Rakhine state, where tens of thousands of people displaced in 2012 by inter-communal violence between Rakhine Buddhists on the one hand, and Rohingyas and other Muslims on the other, have been living for more than two years without access to adequate water, sanitation or healthcare. The special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar said some displaced Rohingya Muslims had died in their camps because they were unable to access emergency medical attention.^[271] Unable to leave their camps and villages because of movement restrictions imposed by the government, Rohingya IDPs also struggle to find livelihood opportunities.

Around 20,000 IDPs were still living in camps and transit sites in the Philippine city of Zamboanga at the end of 2014, more than 15 months after being displaced by fighting between the government and a faction of the Moro National Liberation Front. They have struggled to access basic services, in particular water and healthcare, and more than 200 people have died in displacement, half of them children under five. Pneumonia was the leading cause of death.^[272] Children were also at risk of malnutrition. An October 2014 survey conducted in camps and transit sites showed that more than half of those over two years old were stunted.^[273]

In Papua New Guinea, around 4,000 IDPs displaced by inter-communal vio- lence in May 2010 were still living in very poor conditions in a camp in Bulolo town, Morobe province. The government initially provided food, water and shelter materials, but a lack of funding meant the assistance tailed off in less than a year, despite IDPs' continuing needs.^[274] In the absence of food aid, many struggled to feed their families during 2014.^[275]

There is little information available on the assistance and protection needs of IDPs who take refuge outside official camps. The relative invisibility of those living with host families or in rented accommodation means they are often overlooked by responders, who also tend to assume that their needs are less acute than those of IDPs in camps.

A profiling exercise conducted in 2014 among IDPs living in host communities in Zamboanga found otherwise. It revealed respondents' main concerns to be lack of access to shelter, healthcare and livelihoods. Some had received humanitarian assistance, but less than a third were able to provide for their families' basic needs because they had depleted their assets and lost their livelihoods as a result of their displacement.^[276]

Durable solutions

The majority of south-east Asia's IDPs live in protracted displacement. Some have been displaced for up to 15 years and few were able to return, integrate locally or settle elsewhere during 2014. In the absence of monitoring, it is difficult to estimate how many IDPs may have achieved durable solutions, but evidence suggests they face significant obstacles in doing so. The longer displacement goes on, the less data is available on IDPs' needs and whereabouts.

That said, at least 76,000 IDPs were reported to have gone back to their places origin during the year, nearly all of them in the Philippines. Many were people who fled their homes for short periods, but others displaced before 2014 also managed to return. The number of IDPs in Zamboanga decreased from 65,000 early in the year to 35,000 by the end of it. In Myanmar, at least 6,200 IDPs were able to return.

For the majority of IDPs across the region return is their preferred settlement option, but they face many obstacles in the form of continuing conflict in their places of origin, the destruction of homes and infrastructure, loss of livelihoods and inability to exercise their housing, land and property (HLP) rights. Those who had weak tenure security before their displacement have particular difficulty in reclaiming their homes and property.

In Myanmar, ongoing fighting, the presence of UXO and landmines, and failure to restore HLP rights continued to hamper returns in Kachin and northern Shan states. In Rakhine state, Muslim IDPs' lack of freedom of movement continued to prevent them from accessing healthcare, education and livelihoods. In Kachin and northern Shan states, the Myanmar armed forces have also given IDPs' land to agribusinesses. Without formal tenure documents, those affected were unable to reclaim their property.^[277]

Governments often encourage return, but in some cases they have used security considerations to prevent it in favour of relocation. They have tended, however, not to consult or inform IDPs properly about such moves, the upshot being that those relocated struggle to access basic services and livelihoods and generally to rebuild their lives.

In Zamboanga, the main obstacle to return has been slow progress in rebuilding the 10,000 homes destroyed during the conflict. The city government's decision to declare "no-build zones" in Muslim-majority coastal areas where many IDPs had their homes has also been a factor, as has weak tenure security. The authorities have prioritised those who own land for return and assistance, leaving those without formal tenure living in protracted displacement in camps and transit sites.^[278] Many were forced to move to such places in 2014, where without adequate access to basic services and livelihood opportunities, they have been unable to start their recovery and face deepening poverty and vulnerability.

For those attempting to integrate locally or settle elsewhere, their lack of access to land, basic services and livelihood opportunities has impeded their pursuit of durable solutions. Many do not have tenure security, and without it may also face the risk of eviction. Many are unable to afford to buy and register land, and competition for scarce resources, including land, has been a source of tensions and clashes between IDPs and their host communities. This has been the case in West Timor, the Indonesian portion of the island of Timor, where around 22,000 IDPs displaced in 1999 are still living in protracted displacement in camps.^[279]

National and international response

Several countries in the region took concrete steps to meet IDPs' assistance and protection needs in 2014, particularly during the emergency relief phase. Most have failed, however, to put policies and resources in place to address their longterm recovery needs effectively. All too often displacement is seen as a temporary problem requiring only short-term solutions, and decisions to wind down humanitarian assistance often do not coincide with IDPs' needs having been met.

In Zamboanga, the city government announced the end of the humanitarian phase in August, but IDPs still had significant needs and no early recovery strategy was put in place to ensure a smooth transition between humanitarian and development interventions. The authorities have made repeated commitments to prioritise long-term solutions, but progress has been only limited.

The Indonesian government made a number of efforts to address protracted displacement. The national development agency held consultations in early 2014 with local authorities in West Timor and international agencies working in the province, with the aim of using their experiences to inform the country's mediumterm development plan for 2015 to 2019.^[280] In March, the president instructed minis- tries to improve the handling of "social conflicts" and continue efforts to address people's post-conflict needs, including those of IDPs.^[281] Whether such commitments have translated into improvements on the ground is unclear.

No new legislative frameworks on displacement were adopted in the region in 2014, but significant progress was made in the Philippines, where the lower house of congress adopted a bill in August covering people displaced by both conflict and disasters.^[282]

International response efforts continued in Myanmar, the Philippines and to a lesser extent Papua New Guinea. In other countries, such as Indonesia and Timor Leste, humanitarians were no longer engaged and the shift to recovery was considered complete, although in reality IDPs continued to face challenges.

International assistance plays a significant role in plugging gaps in government responses to displacement, particularly in Myanmar and the Philippines. That said, restricted humanitarian access to some areas of Myanmar affected by conflict and displacement, such as Kachin and northern Shan states, hampered responders' efforts. In Rakhine state, international staff have also been harassed, threatened and accused of bias in favour of Muslim IDPs when providing aid.^[283]

Efforts to plan for recovery and longterm solutions as early as possible in the relief phase and to engage the development sector in the response to displacement were limited in 2014, despite increased recognition in recent years of the importance of doing so. Underfunding continued to hamper the implementation of early recovery programmes.

In Zamboanga, efforts by the international humanitarian community, including donors, focused mainly on the delivery of immediate relief and transitional shelter solutions. As of August, the UN's action plan for the city was funded at 47 per cent, but the early recovery component had received no support at all. The humanitarian country team's adoption of a durable solutions strategy for the city's IDPs at the end of the year laid the foundation for continued international involvement in 2015, and raised hopes that increased attention would be paid to long-term solutions, particularly the right of the most vulnerable IDPs to adequate housing.

The strategic response plan for Myanmar for 2014 appealed for $192 million. One of its key strategic objectives was to restore livelihoods and access to basic services of all IDPs in Rakhine, Kachin and northern Shan states, and to link up initiatives with recovery and development efforts.^[284] As of the end of the year the overall appeal was 58 per cent funded, but the early recovery component at only 22 per cent.

Building on initiatives taken in recent years to improve national and regional capacity for disaster risk management,^[285] members of ASEAN made commitments in 2014 to address displacement caused by disasters, including the adoption of policies and laws to strengthen IDPs' assistance and protection.^[286]

260 Shelter-NFI-CCCM cluster, Rakhine Cluster Analysis Report, 1 November 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/uat2Ig; Shelter-NFI-CCCM cluster, Kachin and Northern Shan Cluster Analysis Report, 1 January 2015, available at: http://goo.gl/uv3QX3

261 Mindanao protection cluster, 15 January 2015

262 Mindanao protection cluster, 14 March 2014

263 OCHA, Myanmar Humanitarian Bulletin, Issue 4, 30 April 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/Mmb31s

264 Karen Rivers Watch, Afraid to go home: Recent violent conflict and human rights abuses in Karen State, 7 November 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/TjA79J

265 ETAN, West Papua Report, February 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/eDAH4P

266 Jakarta Globe, NTT clash kills one, displaces hundreds, 18 August 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/3QVTG4

267 Tempo, Police deploys hundreds to conflict-torn Lembata, 18 August 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/ZyIst7

268 Women's League of Burma, Same Impunity, Same Pattern: Report of Systematic Sexual Violence in Burma's Ethnic Areas, January 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/jlWzpI

269 The Irrawaddy, Burma Army Detains 14 Kachin IDPs, NGO Says, 5 May 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/WEZs2k

270 Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, On development and war, 18 January 2015, available at: http://goo.gl/73mTo0

271 RFA, UN Envoy Slams 'Deplorable' Conditions in Myanmar Camps, 28 July 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/B8w4Jv

272 OCHA, Zamboanga Humanitarian Snapshot, 30 January 2015, available at: http://goo.gl/uTkV7B

273 OCHA, Humanitarian Bulletin Philippines, Issue 29, 1 November 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/qmA5UZ

274 PNG Loop, Shortage of food at Bulolo Care Center, 27 December 2013, available at: http://goo.gl/gR1YIL

275 IDMC interviews with IDPs in Bulolo, Papua New Guinea, October 2014

276 UNHCR, Home-based IDP profiling, Final analysis December 2014, 7 February 2015

277 IDMC, Myanmar: comprehensive solutions needed for recent and long-term IDPs alike, 1 July 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/fWmFfu

278 UNHCR, Zamboanga: Continued displacement, June 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/UkSnbH

279 The Jakarta Post, The forgotten crisis of former East Timorese refugees, 4 September 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/zpcNf8

280 Jakarta Post, Eastern Indonesia gives input on rights on land and housing, 16 January 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/nOnjO5

281 Jakarta Post, Govt keeping an eye out for potential social conflicts, 10 March 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/EUs6EJ

282 Philippine Congress, Proposed Internal Displacement Act of 2014 approved on 2nd Reading, 14 August 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/AmnlJ6

283 IDMC, Myanmar: comprehensive solutions needed for recent and long-term IDPs alike, 1 July 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/zie3KA

284 OCHA, 2014 Strategic Response Plan Myanmar (December 2013), 31 December 2013, available at: http://goo.gl/pzzDb8

285 Brookings, Strengthening regional and national capacity for disaster risk management: the case of ASEAN, November 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/nAnMS6

286 Rappler, ASEAN leaders forge action points for PDDs, 18 October 2014, available at: http://goo.gl/8zLscG