The Grimshaw Review of International Affairs Vol. 2, No. 1 A constructivist examination of the role of shared norms, identities, and perceptions in shaping humanitarian action suggests that humanitarian actors could foster a “principled issue network” driven by shared values rather than material concerns (Keck and Sikkink, 1998, p. 2). However, the persistent exclusion of the Rohingya themselves from aid initiatives reveals that these norms remain underdeveloped in practice. The “saviour” and “recipient” roles often perpetuated through humanitarian aid arguably align with constructivism’s focus on identity and perception; these roles are socially constructed through repeated interactions and institutional practices (Büthe et al., 2012, p. 575). Contrastingly, postcolonialism critiques these identities through a racialised and historical – not normative – lens, revealing how humanitarian aid’s entanglement with colonial legacies and power hierarchies further compounds these issues. For example, Belloni (2007, p. 454) argues that humanitarianism does not arise from a transnational morality but instead perpetuates the unequal power dynamics between the West and less developed nations, with Western states harnessing humanitarianism to further their own interests rather than addressing the needs of those they purport to help. This critique is especially relevant to aid structures that have continued the narrative of victimhood over empowerment for the Rohingya. Moreover, some postcolonial scholars emphasise the complicity of humanitarian aid in unintentionally prolonging disasters (Aloudat and Khan, 2022, p. 1), while others critique the appropriation of “humanitarian” principles by actors whose agendas often conflict with the core values of aid, including “neutrality, impartiality, and independence” (Ferris, 2011, p. 16). This dynamic is particularly evident in Cox’s Bazar, where aid distribution frequently reinforces existing hierarchies, sidelining local voices and reducing the Rohingya to passive recipients of assistance (Lough et al., 2022, p. 44). For example, Daigle (2022; cited in Lough et al., 2022, p. 44) notes that the dominance of white, European, or North American men in leadership roles in humanitarian missions often leads to the prioritisation of life-saving concerns over gender issues – a dynamic which not only results in marginalisation on 18