Author: Lt. Gen. Vinay Shankar
(Retd)
Publication:
Date:
For obvious reasons, the flavour
of the coming month is going to be prescriptions. The new government is
in place and most of us would like to offer unsolicited advice on what
it should be doing aware that those in the decision-making loop perhaps
know more of the subject than we do. The problem is that frequently the
impulse to offer advice is irresistible.
On the security and foreign policy
fronts, the emphasis seems to be on neighbours. Especially China and Pakistan.
The problem in both these instances is the time at which the transfer of
responsibility is taking place. The dialogue process initiated a while
ago has already traversed some distance from a given standpoint and the
responsibilities are being inherited midstream. The difficulties that thus
arise, stem from the existence of differing perspectives. If there was
total congruence of positions the negotiations could proceed without the
pace of discussions having to slow down or having to change course. But
the statements being made reflect, albeit not directly, that course corrections
may be necessary. The postponement (wholly avoidable whichever way one
looks at it, should have been scheduled for a later date) of the discussions
on nuclear confidence building measures (CBMs) with Pakistan is a pointer
in this direction.
Trashing what has transpired would
be unwise and reflect a lack of maturity. The genius would lie in maintaining
the momentum and direction of the peace process with Pakistan and the border
negotiations with China and yet manipulating positional changes - if there
are any - with such subtlety that they go unnoticed. The importance of
conveying continuity of national policies - foreign and defence - does
not need reiteration.
It was on the question of neighbours
that an interesting comment was made recently by a senior bureaucrat, someone
whose responsibilities include analysing and assessing the contours of
our relationship with our neighbours. The point he made was that while
the country's focus has been on the threat from Pakistan and maybe China,
the more serious threat to India today was from Bangladesh. If we think
about it, there is considerable merit in his observation. The danger need
not always be from powerful militaries with their tanks, guns, missiles,
fighter aircraft or bombers. There are other evidently innocuous yet equally
potent means through which a country's security can be imperilled. Bangladesh
is a classic example of how and from where such threats can manifest themselves.
Whether unintended or by design, the menace is a reality and only a viewer
with blinkers will not see the deeper and more complex threat that Bangladesh
poses.
Estimates suggest that approximately
20 million Bangladeshis have clandestinely entered India over a period
of time. Individually these people may be poor and harmless but collectively
(even if they might be dispersed in pockets across the length and breadth
of the country, Intelligence Bureau estimates approximately 10 lakhs in
Delhi alone) they can have a serious destabilising influence. Migratory
people uniformly pose this problem in the host country across the world.
Till the numbers are below certain thresholds, humanitarian sensitivities
prevail over issues of job losses and the changing demographic base. But
once the numbers cross levels that can endanger the as it is fragile, social,
religious and political balance as it has been happening in our context,
the alarm signals ought to go up. Some warning bells have been sounded
from time to time, but true to our national reputation of being a soft
state, the Central and affected state governments' (Bengal, Assam, Meghal!
aya, Tripura and Mizoram) response has been that of either denial or limited
to simply acknowledging awareness of the problem. That we have not yet
been provoked into specific action even if it is limited to containment,
suggests that the gravity of the issue has not yet fully registered.
In our dealings with Bangladesh
it appears that we quite often forget that while the country may be new
but its inhabitants have not changed, inhabitants who had traditionally
viewed India as enemy country. Secondly, it could be that from Bangladesh's
perspective our assistance in their liberation was not because of a sense
of compassion for its people but because we wanted to dismember Pakistan.
Hence, interaction with that country on the basis of the belief that we
have done it a good turn, is inevitably going to rebound. Thirdly, it would
be sensible to recognise Bangladesh's apprehension (legitimate in her perception)
that its big Hindu neighbour's next ambition could well be to undo the
partition of 1947.
Therefore, what does Bangladesh
do to counter the threat from India? The first answer is to join Pakistan
in working aggressively towards keeping India destabilised. The ISI had
since the Fifties laid the base for support to insurgents in the Northeast.
Now the DGFI is building up on that base with the cooperation and help
of the ISI to expand the reach, extent and level of support. Consequently,
virtually all insurgent groups in that region have sanctuaries in Bangladesh.
Simultaneously, the government has chosen to remain unmindful of the terrorist
organisations and networks that have made Bangladesh their hub. A careful
scrutiny of recent intelligence reports would reveal that in the last two
to three years Bangladesh appears to be emerging as the new epicentre of
global terrorism. Besides its home-grown terrorist outfits, the Al Qaeda
and its affiliates are lodged there. So are most of the Pakistani militant
and terrorists groups as also the spawns of the Taliban. The co! cktail
there, potentially, is extremely lethal. The discovery of nuclear fissile
material being smuggled into that country corroborates this assessment;
clearly, some terribly sinister developments are in the offing from within
that country. A recent report brought out by the Canadian Security Intelligence
Service highlights the extent of terrorist activities taking place in Bangladesh.
It is indeed quite revealing.
Like Pakistan, Bangladesh also chose
to bolster its image of "self" by emphasising religion. It declared itself
an Islamic state and sought to foster friendly relations with all other
Islamic nations. Stress on Islam led to heightened intolerance pervading
its society. Consequently, we witness the persistent persecution of minorities.
The population of Hindus, also Buddhists, has as a result reduced to a
small fraction of what it was (from 70 lakhs to now about 10 lakhs) when
Bangladesh gained its independence. Even Christians are routinely subjected
to ostracism through employment denial and other discriminatory practices.
Levels of poverty and illiteracy
in Bangladesh are high. The poor and the uneducated are gullible to religious
fanaticism. Unfortunately, successive governments in Bangladesh have done
little to curtail the activities of the fundamentalists. On our part we
have been patient and tolerant of the Bangladesh government's position
in the belief that politically it would be inexpedient for any government
to act differently. But the situation progressively worsens with Bangladesh
showing scant respect for our concerns. Our pleas for action against the
ULFA, the Naga and other insurgent groups taking refuge in Bangladesh continue
to be ignored. Similarly, when we draw attention to the terrorist groups
operating from within that country the response is that of complete denial.
We may recall the frustrating experience of our director general, Border
Security Force when he visited Dhaka recently.
After 9/11, the wars in Afghanistan
and Iraq and because of the discriminatory facets of the war against terror,
there is increasing ferment in the Islamic world. At the global level the
situation is potentially explosive. We would be horribly myopic if we ignored
the possibility of India also being a target country. If we juxtapose this
danger to our inherently unstable social order the seriousness of the threat
to us becomes clearly identifiable.
We therefore can no longer afford
drift. Bangladeshis need "Lebensraum" and simultaneously its leadership
is only too happy to aid and assist our political system as it stoops to
exploit religion and caste to serve its purpose. The ongoing demographic
invasion from Bangladesh must stop. Given the terrain, the length of the
international border (in excess of 4,000 kms) and the distribution of population
astride it, the problem is not confined to mere policing. It has a complex
human dimension to it. But that should not deter us from taking action.
There would inevitably be pressures when we begin to move, but once having
charted a pragmatic and fair course of action we must remain firm.
It is time we relegated all other
bilateral issues with Bangladesh to second place. The first objective should
be to reduce the porosity of the border, conscious that it would be impracticable
to completely dam the flow. But it can definitely be reduced to a prostate
trickle. If India is to shine all over, this is one important step that
must be taken.
