The Mittal Institute welcomes Professor Nasir Uddin, a Visiting Scholar from the Department of Anthropology at the University of Chittagong, Bangladesh, where he is a senior faculty member. He is a cultural anthropologist who will be working in our offices through mid-summer on a theoretical, comparative and ethnographic understanding of the “politics of genocide denial.” We spoke with Professor Nasir Uddin to learn more about his research.
Nasir Uddin, Mittal Institute Visiting Scholar
Mittal Institute: Welcome, Nasir! What drew you to Harvard University?
Nasir Uddin: I believe Harvard University offers an unparalleled academic environment to deepen my theoretical, comparative and ethnographic understandings of the politics of genocide denial. As the world’s leading educational institution, Harvard University is the home to eminent scholars, globally renowned schools and some of the most comprehensive library collections. These resources make it an ideal place for me to explore the complexities of genocide, the South Asian refugee crisis and broader human rights challenges.
During my stay at Harvard, I intend to conduct archival research to critically examine the causes and consequences of genocide on a global scale in general, and in South and Southeast Asia in particular. I aim to engage closely with scholars specializing in genocide studies, refugees, forcibly displaced people and international human rights. Harvard’s interdisciplinary academic ecosystem will enable me to collaborate meaningfully across the departments, centers and institutes, including the Department of South Asian Studies, Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard Law School, Harvard Asia Center, Harvard Divinity School, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Studies, Genocide Studies Program at Ukrainian Research Institute, and Davis Center, among others. Furthermore, affiliation with Harvard would open up avenues for academic and intellectual exchange with scholars working at nearby institutions in the Boston academic consortium—such as Boston University, MIT, Northeastern University, Tufts University and the University of Massachusetts. The prospects of these cross-institutional collaborations significantly strengthen Harvard’s appeal as the most befitting destination for advancing my research.
Mittal Institute: Can you elaborate on your current research at Harvard on “the politics of genocide denial”? Why is this research important, and how does this denial operate at both state and global levels?
Nasir Uddin: The central question guiding my research is: Why are some genocidal cases recognized as genocides while others are not? More specifically, my research explores why the experiences and testimonies of genocide survivors often hold less weight than global geopolitical interests in determining such recognitions. This inquiry examines how international power dynamics influence the recognition or denial of genocide despite meeting criteria established by the Genocide Convention in 1948 and the Rome Statutes in 1998. Focusing on the 2017 Rohingya Genocide in Myanmar, the research investigates the political dynamics surrounding its denial and the broader consequences of non-recognition. It seeks to understand the reasons behind international inaction and the resulting impact it has on the affected communities and nations. Through comparative analysis across some other recognized genocides, it attempts to identify arrays, inconsistencies and biases in global responses, ultimately aiming to develop a framework for understanding the politics of genocide denial in varied contexts.
The project additionally explores the socio-political, psychological, and cultural consequences of non-recognition for refugees, survivors and their descendants. By examining the roles of state sovereignty, geopolitical interests, international institutions and media narratives, the project ultimately aims to contribute to the growing field of genocide studies. This research project intends to offer pragmatic recommendations to the government, international bodies, policymakers and civil society organizations to address the genocide denial and non-recognition issue to foster more transparent and effective responses to future potential atrocities.
Nasir Uddin in the Rohingya Refugee Camp in Cox’s Bazar.
Rohingya Refugee Camp.
Research Assistants and Field Assistants with Nasir Uddin working on the “Genocidal Denial” Project in the Refugee Camps.
Mittal Institute: You’ve developed the concept of ‘subhuman’ life—can you explain what this is, what inspired this theoretical framing, and how it has evolved over the years?
Nasir Uddin: Combined with my deeply engaged ethnographic research on/with the Rohingya refugees for more than two decades and my critical readings of the theories regarding forcibly displaced people, refugees, migration, stateless people, IPDs, non-citizens, camp people and asylum seekers, I discovered that the majority of scholars for their theoretical formulation considered human beings as ‘legal objects’ instead of their ‘human subjectivity’. I found that the existing theories were inadequate to understand the extreme form of vulnerability and the critical conditions of Rohingya refugees living in the borderlands of Bangladesh and Myanmar. Such inadequacy created space for the emergence of a new theoretical foundation, and my “subhuman” theory filled up this vacuum.
The concept of ‘subhuman’ provides a lens for understanding individuals living in extreme, marginalized, and horrific conditions. This theory sheds light on the profound vulnerability of people under authoritarian regimes and totalitarian states. It also offers a new perspective on phenomena like genocide, ethnocide, ethnic cleansing and demicide. Drawing on solid ethnographic evidence, I propose that five conditions characterize a subhuman existence: (a) atrocious living conditions; (b) illegal objects in legal framework; (c) homeless at home and nowhere to go; (d) free license to be killed, raped, and burned; and (e) a life worthy of extinction. These criteria define a group as ‘subhuman’. In my argument, ‘subhuman’ refers to individuals born into human society but denied a place in the human community. They are not treated with due dignity, rights and recognition that every human deserves. Though they exist— since no state acknowledges, protects and owns them—they are effectively invisible in legal and political terms. They are regarded as like o-manush (non-human) since they do not exist in the legal framework of any state, occupying space between life and death. Lacking status, voice, and rights, they are treated as lesser than human beings. This theory applies to countless people globally who live in such conditions, helping explain the depth of the marginalization and the structure that perpetuates it. However, it is more applicable in the scholarship on forcibly displaced people, refugees, migration, stateless people, IPDs, non-citizens, camp people and asylum seekers.
Mittal Institute: Your book, The Rohingya: An Ethnography of ‘Subhuman’ Life was short-listed for the ICAS book prize in 2020-2021. What do you hope policymakers and international organizations take away from your ethnographic accounts of ‘subhuman’ populations?
Nasir Uddin: One of the key factors why people around the world suffer from extreme vulnerability is the politics of cultural, racial, and religious differences, as well as states’ growing intolerance towards the aforesaid differences and any form of dissent. My ethnographic account of ‘subhuman’ life suggests that the beauty of the modern state system lies in cultural pluralism, which builds an inclusive society, accommodates margins within the national space, and considers people not just as ‘legal objects’ but as ‘human subjects’. My ethnographic research underscores that when the international community, international organizations, humanitarian protection mechanisms, and policymakers prioritize legal recognition, ensure social protection, and affirm the inherent dignity of all individuals, the conditions that produce and sustain subhuman life—those marked by domination, deprivation, exclusion and systemic oppression—can be significantly reduced. By addressing these fundamental injustices, it becomes possible to build more humane, just and equitable social and political landscapes across the global human geography.
My ethnographic research underscores that when … the inherent dignity of all individuals [are affirmed], the conditions that produce and sustain subhuman life—those marked by domination, deprivation, exclusion and systemic oppression—can be significantly reduced.
A glimpse of Kutupalong Rohingya camp, the largest refugee camp in the world.
A community school for Rohingya children in the Refugee camp in Ukhiya, Cox’s Bazar.
Mittal Institute: What advice would you give to early-career researchers undertaking ethnographic work with vulnerable or displaced populations?
Nasir Uddin: I advise early career researchers to understand the lived realities of vulnerable and displaced populations through a bottom-up approach, rather than imposing interpretation from a top-down perspective. This commitment at the early stage of researchers is crucial for producing ethically grounded and socially responsive research. Ethnographic research, in particular, offers a powerful lens through which early career researchers can engage with people’s everyday lived experiences, struggles, and dynamic forms of resilience. By immersing themselves in the field, early-career researchers move beyond the abstract theorization of their surroundings; instead, they come into direct contact with the complexities of human life and existence as it is lived on the margins. I always see that fieldwork can be a transformative experience—what I often prefer to describe as a kind of rebirth of a researcher—in which early-career researchers not only gather data but are also profoundly reshaped by the encounters and insights gained from firsthand knowledge. For early career researchers, empirically grounded and field-based research is not merely an academic exercise, but an essential process for cultivating empathy, reflexivity, and a deeper, more nuanced understanding of vulnerable and displaced communities from their point of view. Through such grounded engagement, early career researchers can challenge dominant narratives, amplify marginalized voices, and contribute meaningfully to scholarship and policy.
Mittal Institute: Looking ahead, what emerging areas of anthropological inquiry most excite you—or worry you—in the context of displacement and identity politics?
Nasir Uddin: The anthropology of displacement and identity politics is rapidly evolving, and several emerging areas stand out as both exciting and worrisome. One of the potential anthropological attentions could be the intersection of digital technology, surveillance and refugee identity formation. As displaced people increasingly interact with digital platforms—whether through biometric registration, digital humanitarian aid systems and social media—their identities are being shaped, tracked, and to some extent manipulated in unprecedented ways. In response to such a controlling mechanism, refugee people are increasingly gaining skills in digital literacy to express their pains and pleasures, atrocious past and critical presents, as well as challenges and potentials, before the international community. Community voices from the protracted refugee situation navigate transnational networks of global rights activism and the international refugee protection regime. Anthropologists have immense opportunities to explore refugees in a transnational space amid digital literacy.
However, the critical and worrisome development is the rise of climate-induced displacement, which challenges the traditional anthropological definition of refugees. As communities are forced to displace due to environmental causes and collapse, identity politics around legitimacy, visibility, and recognition become even more complex. This shift demands new conceptual frameworks that move beyond nation-state boundaries and legal categories to account for ecological loss, cultural reassurance and non-traditional forms of belonging. Most importantly, migration has often been taken into account as a people-centric mobility, but it is evolving in a more impersonal form, posing challenges to the anthropology of displacement and identity.
What excites me most in anthropology’s potential is to offer grounded, and human-centered insights into these evolving dynamics, highlighting not only the resilience of displaced communities but also exploring the structure that renders them invisible, muted and voiceless.
☆ The views represented herein are those of the interview subjects and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Mittal Institute, its staff, or its Steering Committee.