Interview with Rezaul Karim ChowdhuryRohingya program “Not a Refugee Tourism”, needed cost-effective execution

Rezaul Karim Chowdhury, Executive Director of the non-governmental organization COAST Foundation, has called for an interview where he urged for more effective utilization of both national and local NGOs in Rohingya response, in addition to providing cost-efficient humanitarian aid to the Rohingya.

If we cannot make it possible, the government's debt to the World Bank for aid will increase, making assistance more expensive, he said.

He also recommended using local products instead of imported products to provide food and clothing assistance to the Rohingya.

He said that compared to last year, the government's debt to provide humanitarian assistance to the Rohingya has increased by 263 percent this year, and with decreased foreign aid for over 1.156 million to Rohingya response, this has become a major challenge, the impact of which Bangladesh is bearing. 

Rezaul Karim Chowdhury expressed these views in an interview with The Naya Diganta.

How can the Rohingya assistance program be made more cost-effective?

Rezaul: Since the Rohingya relief efforts are centered in Cox's Bazar, it takes four hours to travel to and from the camps. If all response workers were based in Ukhiya Upazilla, time and money could be saved. Overhead and salary costs for the UN and INGOs are higher. Engaging local young people can significantly cut costs. Foreign staff are being paid BDT. 1-2 million, and they stay in luxury hotels in Cox's Bazar, while local young people from Cox's Bazar, Ukhiya, or Dhaka could do this work for BDT 50-60 thousand. Boys and girls from Cox's Bazar, Ukhia, or Dhaka can live on with less money. That is why I am talking about using domestic human resources and NGOs more in Rohingya Response. Using local young people who are more familiar with the language, religion, and culture enables better communication and cooperation with the Rohingya. When foreigners come, interpreters are needed to communicate, but not with the locals. There is no need to import dried fish from Thailand or salt from Japan; Rohingya prefer local foods and dress like Thami from hills and the Lungi from Sirajgonj can be used there. We can source dried fish and salt from Cox's Bazar, which can boost local industries and reduce costs.

The office operational cost for the UN or INGOs in Cox's Bazar is so high!

Rezaul: There is no need to maintain the UN offices in Cox's Bazar. Flights operate from 12 to 16 times a day in Cox's Bazar and Dhaka, from 7.00 am to 10.00 pm. If the offices were shifted to Ukhiya, the pressure on Cox's Bazar town would be less. Traffic jams are prevalent in the small tourist town, as the UN has no place to park its vehicles, so it parks its vehicles on the road near the Cox's Bazar stadium. There is a difference between operating such refugee camps from other places in the world. Staying in Cox’s Bazar, but operations are in camps in Ukhiya. There are 10 to 12 five-star hotels in Cox's Bazar. Many UN and INGO offices are there. Some foreigners are living there too. They are highly expensive. This has become a refugee tourism rather than a refugee operation. These syndromes can be reduced. You can go to Cox's Bazar from Dhaka and return in the afternoon.

So, most of the Rohingya aid is being spent on operational expenses?

Rezaul: We have conducted a scientific study and found that each Rohingya family receives $70 to $91 as aid every month, but the allocation for each Rohingya family is $350 per month. This $350 is the total aid for the Rohingya divided by the number of Rohingyas. Which came this year? Where does the rest money go? We have been going door to door to study what relief materials are in the Rohingya homes. How much does it all cost? On top of that, they get a food ration of twelve dollars every month. There has been talk of cutting this food ration by half to adjust funding crisis.

What is your proposal then?

Rezaul: Rohingya education is being stopped, women's protection is being stopped, and financial assistance is being reduced. So, we have been talking about taking up such cost-effective projects for a long time. But did not find that the UN is saying anything about taking any alternative steps to reduce the costs. We have talked about appointing local young people to the UN offices in Cox's Bazar at low salaries. Local NGOs implement projects, spending only 4.8 percent of the Rohingya assistance. National NGOs implement 33 percent of the projects. BRAC's cost is very high. BRAC manages one-fourth of the total funds. If these projects were implemented through local NGOs, the cost would have been reduced a lot.

The government is under pressure to meet these costs; if the cost of the Rohingya projects cannot be reduced…

Rezaul: The government has already had to borrow $400 million from the World Bank. This pressure will gradually increase. Last year, the government spent 11 percent of its total activities, but this year that expenditure has exceeded 33 percent. The government's humanitarian expenditure on the Rohingya has increased by 263 percent. Grants are being given to UN agencies, but the government has to borrow the money from the World Bank for the same purpose. Which will have to be returned with the public's money.

How can the Rohingyas be involved in employment or production?

Rezaul: Income-generating skilled training should be provided to the Rohingya people. If the UN helps in this work, dependency will decrease. Otherwise, crime will increase among the Rohingyas. The government argues that if the Rohingyas are allowed to work, the locals will not get work. This is true, but the problem is that the daily wage of a daily laborer in the whole country is around BDT. 600, but in Cox's Bazar it is BDT. 200 to 300. Rohingyas have already entered the labor market; their entry cannot be prevented. God knows why the previous government made arrangements for their accommodation in Bhasan Char. If we do not employ the Rohingyas with the help of the OIC and other international organizations, they will become a burden for us.

On the other hand, Rohingya aid has started to decrease…

Rezaul: The most dramatic aid reduction came from the US government, which cut its funding by 72%. The UK cut its funding by 48%. According to the United Nations, $852.4 million was needed for the Rohingya last year; the United States provided $301 million, which was 55 percent of the $548.9 million provided by foreign donors in the same year. As of September 18, 2025, only 38% of the funding requirement has been met. That indicates a ‘serious financial crisis. However, the management cost of implementing projects for the Rohingya is about 70% while the program cost is only 30%. Most of the local NGOs have lost their funding and are now in a dire situation, but their management costs are low. A total of 519 million Bangladeshi taka has been approved for humanitarian projects in the Rohingya camps in the last three months. Most of the funding is for international NGOs. International NGOs pose 44.4% of projects but 63.6% of funding. National NGOs pose 50.8% of projects but get funding for only 33.9%. Local NGOs are severely underfunded, pose 4.8% of projects but get only 2.5% of funding.

What can be done to sustain the Rohingya emergency assistance project?

Rezaul: It is necessary to bring about changes in the implementation and management of Rohingya response projects. There is almost no scope for direct implementation by the UN agencies and international NGOs. Local NGOs need to be given at least 50% of direct funding. Steps should be taken to reduce management costs. A comprehensive dashboard is needed for the funding system. A consortium of local NGOs should be formed to use the funds, and there should not be any intermediaries in this fund management.