|
It is indeed a privilege for me to be invited to deliver a lecture at
the United Service Institution of India, an Institution that has been
in the forefront of work on studies relating to national security. The
USI has been doing great service to the country in building a
strategic culture that simply did not exist till recently. Preoccupied
with electoral politics and short term agendas, those in charge of
policy-making have neither time nor interest to think about the
national security issues in long term. I was initially reluctant to
accept the invitation, as I do not consider myself qualified to speak
on this important subject. My only qualification to speak on the
subject is that I was a victim of the mass migration in 1947 and a
witness to the disastrous consequences of internal displacements and
cross-border migrations for many years in the Northeast. To be giving
the Major General Samir Sinha Memorial lecture adds honour to the
occasion. Major General Sinha was not only associated with the USI
since 1947, but was its Director for nine long years, from 1987 to
1996. It is appropriate that lectures on subjects of importance for
national security are held in his memory. My personal association with
Major General Sinha started when I became a member of the USI during
his tenure as the Director.
The problem of demographic changes and the growing imbalance have
serious implications for national security. If the complex issues
being thrown up by this imbalance are not addressed adequately, they
could threaten the very survival of the Indian Union as a sovereign
republic. Successive governments are guilty of inadequate response to
this very serious problem.
Military is only one aspect of the complex problem of national
security. The military can do little except contain the problem for a
brief period, until other aspects of the problem – political, social
and economic – are adequately addressed. Demographic imbalance has,
both, short term and long-term implications for national security.
India is poised to emerge as a world political and economic power, but
that hope would remain a dream unless we are serious in tackling this
problem instead of treating it as a hostage to electoral politics. The
2001 census is an important source of information to learn about the
serious imbalance in social and economic conditions that is developing
in different parts of the country. I quote only a few facts to
underline the point. The Indian population on 1 March 2001 was 1027
million. In ten years, the population increased by 181 million – an
increase of 21.3 per cent though a slight decline in the increase as
compared to 23.9 per cent in the previous decade. But more worrying is
that Bihar, the third most populous state in the country, recorded the
highest growth, which increased to 28.4 per cent as compared 23.4 per
cent in the previous decade. Andhra Pradesh recorded the sharpest
decline – 13.9 per cent from 24.2 per cent in the previous decade. UP,
Maharashtra and Bihar in that order are the most populated states in
India. West Bengal has the highest density of population followed by
Bihar. The literacy rate was the highest in Kerala (90.9 per cent) and
lowest in Bihar (47.5 per cent).
The 2001 census data fully confirms the common perception that BIMARU
states (Bihar, MP, Rajasthan and UP) are the core of the population
problems in India. Paradoxically, however, from the point of literacy
level, Andhra Pradesh may be classified as a BIMARU state in South
India. Other telling statistics are that nine states have a population
of over 50 million, 10 states (including a Union Territory) over 10
million, and 16 states (including six Union Territories) less than 10
million. Sikkim has a population of only 0.54 million and Mizoram only
0.89 million. Union Territory of Delhi has the highest density of
population and Arunachal Pradesh the lowest. Among the states, Bihar
registered the highest increase, followed by UP and West Bengal. Assam
and Nagaland are in the middle, and Manipur and Sikkim are among the
lowest. All the southern states are demographically progressive and
the 2001 census data confirms the analysis in terms of North-South
demographic divide.
The demographic imbalance among various states creates problems, more
so in a democracy. Democracy is a number game, where the winner takes
all. It is the numbers that decide who controls the levers of power.
The problem gets more complicated when the distortions in the relative
strength of various ethnic groups are due to internal displacements in
the country or external migrations from neighbouring countries.
The history of movement of people from one place to another is as old
as the history of mankind. But earlier there were rarely any protests
against the immigrants. The problem of refugees, migrants, stateless
and displaced persons, which one hears so often today, was unheard
till not too long ago. The problem of the integration of migrants into
the host societies started only when ethnic diversities became sharp,
and the modern development processes made their social assimilation
more difficult. In developing countries like India, there is intense
competition between various ethnic and religious groups for the fruit
of development. It is in this context that one has to understand the
conflict of interest between the local inhabitants and the so-called
'aliens'. The aliens become easy scapegoats for the economic hardship
of the local people. During the last half-century, the South Asian
countries have witnessed the largest movement of people in recorded
human history, both within the national boundaries as well as across
them. Within India while the process of development caused large scale
migrations from rural to urban areas, the regional disparities have
resulted in movement of people from the impoverished to prosperous
regions. Migrations from labour surplus regions, particularly during
the plantation and harvesting seasons, are quite common. Large-scale
migration of labour has been taking place from states like Bihar and
Jharkhand to Punjab and even West Bengal in recent years. Another
factor contributing to migrations is violence and terrorism against
the minority community. The migration of large number of Hindus from
Punjab in the eighties and the Kashmiri Pandits from the Valley in
Jammu and Kashmir in the early nineties are examples of recent
migrations.
In respect of cross-border migrations, the dimensions of the problem
have been even larger. Ever since the partition of the country,
according to some estimates, about 35 million people have been
involved in cross-border movement in search of security of life,
honour and property, and sometimes to escape from religious
prosecution and other forms of discrimination. War and civil strife
are other factors that have resulted in large-scale migrations.
Economic hardships, a desire for ethnic, racial, ideological and
religious homogeneity have also driven people to leave their homes and
migrate to the neighbouring countries.
The unleashing of 'jihadi' forces and international terrorism, to
which are connected the drugs and arms and ammunition trafficking,
have further complicated the issue. Together, the resultant movements
of people have serious security implications. The security threat from
these migrations has seriously undermined the bilateral relations and
inter-state cooperation among countries in South Asia. It is not
possible to understand the dynamics of the relationship between these
countries without understanding the nature of movements. They impact
very strongly both on internal politics and foreign policy. Military
threats are no doubt important and cannot be ignored, but equally
important are non-military threats. The epicentres of threats could be
in environmental, demographic, ecological, and economic domains. They
get more serious and complicated when linked to internal displacements
and external migrations. However, it is not possible to appreciate the
seriousness of the situation without understanding the political
dimension.
Political Dimension
Security is a complex construct. Threat to national security can be
interpreted in many ways. It is an action of sequence of events that
could threaten the quality of life for its citizens, or it could
significantly narrow the range of policy choices available to the
government. Illegal migration causes politicisation of the issues
leading to ethnic and religious conflicts in the host country with
their natural fall-out on the bilateral relations. Drugs, guns and
international terrorism coupled with growing corruption and
criminalisation of politics convert this already volatile mix into a
dangerous brew, which seriously impacts on India's national security.
Many of the security problems that are viewed as political problems
have demographic roots. Converse is also true. Policy interventions
that are proposed and implemented with the intention of dealing with
the demographic problem often result in distinctly political
consequences. The centrality of India, both in terms of geography and
political development, in South Asia, further underlines the
importance of demographic factor for India's national security. The
paradox, however, is that while political rhetoric concerning
immigrants and refugees has increased, political will to take
practical measures to check infiltration of illegal immigrants has in
fact decreased. While all political parties in the fray in the current
assembly elections in Assam are aware of the seriousness of the
problem, few are making it an election issue. In fact, it is the other
way around. The Congress Party by amending the Foreigner's Act through
an ordinance just before the assembly elections wanted to send a
message to the illegal migrants, many of whom now play a crucial role
in the outcome of the elections, that they have nothing to fear even
if the IMDT Act has been held ultra wires by the Supreme Court. The
Union Government has brought back the Act through the back door by
amending the Foreigner's Act only for Assam for gaining political
advantage in the electoral battle. The politics for power at any cost
has destroyed the ideological base of most political parties. Blatant
opportunism is increasingly robbing the politics in the country of
legitimacy.
There is continuing dynamic and intricate relationship between the
issues pertaining to population on the one hand, and to those
pertaining to society and politics on the other. The demographics have
not generally paid much attention to these interactions. It has been
confirmed, both theoretically and empirically, that the demographic
characteristics of a society invariably influence the politics of that
society. Therefore, not surprisingly, politicisation of the
demographic issues occurs not only in India but also all over the
world. Demographic variations as a factor influencing internal
politics, however, could be of various types. They range from internal
migrations, increased birth rate, or reduced mortality rate,
cross-border migrations, or the dismemberment of a country.
The close connection between population growths and migrations is well
established. As early as in 1798, Malthus in his celebrated 'Essay on
Population' dwelt extensively on the growth of population in England.
But even demographers are not unanimous in their approach to managing
the various issues. The economic demographers and political
demographers have opposite points of view about the causes of
migrations. The economists argue that in the sending country as
compared to the receiving country the wages are low, employment
opportunities fewer, and agricultural land use poor. Therefore, the
so-called push factor is in operation resulting in out-migration from
the sending country. In contrast, however, the political scientists
emphasise the disequilibria within the sending country itself and not
between the sending and the receiving country. Since there are
regional and other sorts of disparities within the sending countries,
the disadvantaged people migrate to other countries to escape from
their miseries, and eventually contribute to the disequilibria in the
receiving country as well. While the migrants leave their country in
search of better wages, prospective employers in the receiving country
welcome them for the cheaper services they provide as compared to the
native workers. The opposition to the Bangladeshi migrant is on
account of political factors. While some political parties turn a
blind eye to their presence, the others oppose their presence also in
terms of electoral politics when they are projected as racial,
communal or ethnic threat.
There is another interesting feature of these migrations. Empirical
evidence from our neighbouring countries suggest where migrations are
politically determined, they often diminish the ethnic heterogeneity
of the country of origin, whereas economic hardship driven migrations
have made the countries of destination more heterogeneous. The
phenomenon of cross-border movements together with the inter-state
conflicts they generate are increasingly becoming a major concern all
over the world. Since the phenomenon is closely linked to the
principles of self-determination, national integration and the
politics of nation building, its nature and dimensions often become
extremely complicated. The complexity of the issues involved is
evident from the dissimilar stand taken by states with regard to such
questions as ethnic loyalties, secessionist movements and so on, both
within and outside their respective national boundaries,
Population pressures can lead to conflicts in a number of ways: first,
because of population pressure on resources, that may be already
scarce, leading to expansionist tendencies; second, when the
clandestine population movement affects the demographic balance of the
host region to the detriment of the interest of the local political
elite, the latter are forced to enter into a relationship with the
country of origin of the migrants. Of all kinds of factors impinging
upon politics, however, the most complex are the ones having religious
and ethno-nationalistic roots. The inter-state conflicts rooted in
ethnic and religious discords are the most intractable and most
violence-prone of all the issues relating to international conflicts,
because they draw their sustenance from human emotions, which can
often be irrational. Most of the migrations from the neighbouring
countries have ethno-nationalistic and religious roots.
In the neighbouring Bhutan the majority Drukpas has forced a large
number of ethnic Nepalese Lhotsampas to leave the country and seek
refuge in India and Nepal. This influx into India was largely
responsible for the launch of the anti-foreigner movement in the
receiving areas in Assam. In Myanmar, that was part of British India
till not long ago, about 900,000 Indians had to leave after it gained
independence in 1948. Making Burmese the official language was the
first strong signal that Indians were no longer welcome in Myanmar. A
number of inter-ethnic conflicts owe their origin to demographic
factors. Sinhalese-Tamil conflict in Sri Lanka is one the many
examples where demographic-factors had serious consequences for
national security of the country. Here, like in Myanmar, the first
signal was the declaration of Sinhala as the official language of Sri
Lanka, thus, hurting the interests of a large number of Tamils. The
Tamils who came to Sri Lanka centuries ago were made to feel alien in
their own country. But unlike in Myanmar, they could not be pushed out
of the country, as they decided to assert their autonomy in areas
where they were in majority.
Assam and the Northeast
The problem has assumed serious proportions in Assam and other states
in the Northeast. Population in Assam has increased from 10.837
millions to 26.656 millions in 2001. The decadal growth of Muslims
increased from 34.5 per cent in the previous decade to 36 per cent in
2001. Migration-security interface has close connection with
population growth. The demographic changes in Assam as a result of
external and internal migrations have brought with them religious,
ethnic and linguistic conflicts. Some of these migrations date back to
the nineteenth century, when the then colonial government decided to
bring in labour from Nepal and tribals from Bihar to meet the demand
for labour in the tea-plantations in Bengal and Assam. So great was
the pressure of the Nepalese in the region that Assam Rifles came to
be manned mostly by the Gurkhas. Santhals came as indentured labourers.
They are treated as aliens, especially in the Bodo dominated areas,
even after about two hundred years. Marginalised and getting
increasingly disenfranchised, their living conditions are pathetic.
They are frequent victims of mass violence for ethnic cleansing. Assam
is a classic case of political and economic destabilisation due to
demographic factors. Because of its geographical location and its rich
natural resources, Assam has been attracting migrants for centuries.
But the problems have become more acute since the partition of the
country in 1947. Instead of finding a mutually acceptable solution to
the problem, successive Bangladesh governments deny even the presence
of the illegal Bangladeshi migrants in India. Internal politics in
Assam have not helped the situation. Senior politicians, increasingly
depending on the minority vote bank to secure power, have been giving
protection to illegal immigrants. To what extent some political
leaders have gone to cultivate the immigrant vote bank can be seen
from their statements like that of Hitesh Saikia, the former Chief
Minister of Assam, who emphatically claimed in 1991, that if anybody
could identify a single foreigner in Assam, he was willing to quit
politics forever. The insincere rhetoric was aimed at attracting the
Muslim vote bank. It ignited communal passions in Assam. The Illegal
Migrant Determination Tribunals (IMDT) Act was passed in 1985 to
assure the minority vote bank and to neutralise the Foreigner's Act,
which puts the onus of proving that he or she is an Indian citizen on
the person concerned, whereas under the IMDT Act the onus is on the
authorities to prove that the person is not an Indian citizen.
Politics continue to play a role, and the fact the UPA government
amended the Foreigner's Act through an Ordinance for Assam only to put
the onus on the authorities to prove the illegal status of a person
days before the forthcoming assembly elections in Assam, only shows
that political interests continue to be given preference over national
security interests. In order to strengthen their political base,
different political parties have been manipulating differently the
question of infiltration of the Bangladeshi nationals into India.
The result is the continuing inflow of illegal immigrants from
Bangladesh into Assam that is creating all sorts of political and
security problems in the state.
Assam is not the only state in the Northeast faced with this serious
problem. Arunachal pradesh has still to sort out the problem of the
Chakmas. In Mizoram too, the presence of Chakmas from Bangladesh has
become a major political issue. Both the ruling and the opposition
parties vie with each other to score political points against each
other on the Chakmas issue. Flow of refugees and economic migrants
from Bangladesh has made Tripura a Bengali majority state, leaving its
indigenous tribes feeling marginalised. The division of Assam to
accommodate the demand of some major tribes has led to unending
demands for the creation of more states on ethnic lines. The Bodos who
number about two million, that is double the number of Nagas, want a
separate state. The Kukis demand a separate state in Manipur. The
Nagas want greater Nagaland to encompass all the Naga dominated areas.
The tragedy is that ethnic cleansing through violence has over the
years become part of the strategy to press the demand for a separate
state. The division of Assam and the creation of new tribal dominated
states have not solved the problem. In fact, it has led to the
creation of many more serious conflicts in the region. The
shortsighted strategy was like opening of the proverbial Pandora's
box. The dominant tribes who had earlier agitated against the
so-called Assamese domination, now seek to extend similar domination
over the smaller tribes. Even in a tiny state like Mizoram, which is
frequently quoted as a land of peace, is now confronted with demands
for the creation of more states and autonomous districts from smaller
tribes like Riangs, Brus, Lakhers, Hmars and the Chakmas, whom the
Mizos now regard as outsiders. Some of these tribes like Hmars, Brus
and Riangs have taken to arms to press their demands. Tribal and
racial groups demanding the creation of homelands for their group have
unleashed a campaign of terror to push out all the so-called
'outsiders'. A violent stalemate has been created and the situation is
likely to get only worse.
External Security
The security connection has internal as well as external dimensions,
both causational and consequential linkages. The external dimensions
are even more serious than the internal dimensions. Out of the 28
states that constitute the Indian Union 17 have international borders.
In the Northeast, 98 per cent of the border is international border.
During the colonial period, the British policy in the peripheral areas
was dictated by the requirements of security from external threats.
The division of the country, especially the division of Bengal and the
creation of East Pakistan is responsible for the many cross-border
migrations. It is directly responsible for the huge inflow of migrants
from East Pakistan (Bangladesh). The issue of illegal migrants is one
of the major issues responsible for the tension in bilateral relations
between India and Bangladesh. Many senior Bangladeshi political
leaders have openly talked about India's Northeast to provide living
space to ease its population pressure. Moreover, India-locked
Bangladesh feels threatened by India's size and its military and
economic power. Ever since its creation in 1971, successive
governments have continued the Pakistan policy of supporting
subversive and secessionist forces in the Northeast. One cannot deny
the ground reality that anti-India sentiments today are no less strong
in Bangladesh than in Pakistan. The growing Talibanisation of
Bangladesh is a matter of great concern. Its collaboration with the
ISI for spreading subversion in the Northeast and its support to the
Jehadi forces, including AI-Qaeda, cannot be ignored. Bangladesh has
undergone a big political and social transformation over the past
three decades. Islamic nationalism has replaced Bengali nationalism,
architect ideology of the creation of Bangladesh. This process that
started with Sheikh Mujib has been gathering momentum. Harkat ul Jehad
Islami (HUJI) was formed in 1992. An umbrella group called the
Bangladesh Islamic Manch was set up in 2002. These developments have
caused great sense of insecurity among the Hindus and have resulted in
their exodus in large numbers to India. The capture of a ship with
huge cache of arms on 2 April 2004 in Chittagong goes to show how
Bangladesh has become a centre of jehadi terrorism and a market for
export of arms and explosives to the insurgent groups in the
Northeast. The demand of homeland for the Bengali Muslims in Assam and
other parts of the Northeast is getting louder. When the Bangladesh
Foreign Minister makes the remarks that if Bangladesh is India-locked,
India's Northeast is Bangladesh locked, he is not being frivolous. If
fact, he is being quite serious, as he is claiming parity with the
bigger neighbour through this leverage. When the neighbouring country
harbours a desire to separate the Northeast from India, to fight its
sense of insecurity or for expansionist designs, the flow of illegal
immigrants and the change in the demographic imbalance are matters of
serious concern for India's national security. The Task Force on
Internal Security in a report in 2002 noted with concern the spread of
the ISI network in the Siliguri Corridor, an area that is so crucial
for the security of the Northeast. Large-scale illegal immigration
from East Pakistan/Bangladesh over several decades has been altering
the demographic complexion of the states in West Bengal and the states
in the Northeast. The many ethnic insurgencies flourishing in the
Northeast have developed unprincipled networking of the jehadi forces.
All these developments should have raised alarm bells in India. But
unfortunately, the policy-makers have continued in a state of denial.
It would be suicidal to ignore the rapid growth of Islamic
fundamentalism in our neighbourhood; but it also needs to be stated
that it would be equally dangerous to twist the facts in such a way to
give them a religious colour to play communal politics. Doing so would
be doing what the jehadi forces have not succeeded in doing so far,
that is, to radicalise the Indian Muslims and build a strong base of
the jehadi forces in India.
Indo-Nepal relations are also greatly influenced by the presence of
the Nepalese as also by people of Nepalese origin in India, and the
presence of the people of Indian origin in Nepal, especially in the
Tarai area. Indo-Sri Lanka relations are
similarly influenced by the Sinhala-Tamil relations, and have given
rise to the problem of the LTTE, which has its sympathisers and bases
in south India. Migrations and ethnic factors have further complicated
the relations between India and its neighbouring countries. The
demographic factor plays a crucial role when viewed in this context.
A Management Challenge
In this highly complex situation, there are no easy solutions.
Ideally, the most obvious solution lies in regional cooperation
approach, where the countries take a broad regional view of the
problems and manage the migrations in cooperation with each other. The
concerned countries, big or small, should have a sense of
participation in a regional security system. Such an approach,
unfortunately, is not practicable unless the countries concerned have
friendly and reasonable attitude towards each other. In the absence of
a desire for mutual good, it is not possible to make any meaningful
progress through this approach. But this does not mean that all
diplomatic efforts should stop. While every possible diplomatic move
should be made to persuade Bangladesh to change its attitude in its
own interest, there is no alternative to taking other measures to
manage the situation. A comprehensive strategy that simultaneously
tackles the problem, both internally and externally, and takes into
account the micro and macro-level management problems, has a chance of
success.
Internally, steps will have to be taken to stop large-scale internal
displacement from one part of the country to another. A well-planned
development strategy to reduce regional disparities is a must. The
growing gap between the so-called advanced states and the poor and
underdeveloped states needs to be bridged by sensible development
policies. Assam and other states in the Northeast deserve special
attention. In an extremely heterogeneous and ethnically sensitive
society as in the Northeast, where the acceptance of even legitimate
demands of one group is seen as an assault on the concerns of another,
the demands for further divisions will grow. Peace and development are
two sides of the same coin; you cannot have one without the other. The
solution is economic development backed by a legal and constitutional
framework that is sensitive to local concerns, that gives economic
equity and political fairness to all including the small ethnic
groups. But there can be neither peace nor development without good
governance. There is no reason why the quality of governance in these
strategically sensitive areas cannot be improved. Requirements of both
national security and development are, in fact, the same. The central
government should stop treating the posting of senior administrative
and police officers in these states as punishment postings. The
postings in these areas should be treated as a challenge and only
those who are willing and suitable should be posted. The present All
India Services cadre system in the Northeast should be completely
overhauled. A new Northeast Administrative Service should be
constituted. The officers from this service should not be transferable
to the Centre or any other state. The Union Public Service Commission
(UPSC) should screen volunteers from all the Class One Services,
including the Armed Forces, to fill the posts for the initial
constitution of the new Service.
It must be recognised that there is no way the Indian government can
forcibly send away the large number of illegal immigrants who are
already here, if the Bangladesh government refuses to recognise them
as their citizens and accept them into Bangladesh. In this situation,
the only practical solution is to follow a strategy of strong physical
and legal measures to ensure complete stoppage of any future inflow of
illegal migrants, and to extend the government control over those who
are already here. The suggestion of giving work permits based on
length of their stay and suitability to those already here deserves
serious consideration. The internal controls include raising legal
barriers to their employment and making their stay in the host state
more difficult. Anyone giving shelter or employment to the
unregistered illegal immigrant should lose his or her work permit in
addition to other legal punishments.
The question of migration is closely linked to national borders.
Effective border security control is one of the key elements in
meeting this management challenge. Borders throughout history have
been a controversial subject and evoke strong emotions particularly
from people and groups living near them. In a nation-state the concept
of borders is considered sacrosanct. Borders are markers of a state
system. The problem arises when territory, national identity and
political community do not any more correspond with one another.
National borders are political constructs, projection of territorial
power. Border regions have their own social and economic dynamics.
Revolutionaries hide there, local inhabitants cross them, whenever
services and commodities are cheaper or of better quality on the other
side. and the traders are quick to take advantage of price and tax
differentials. The border security depends on a number of factors like
cohesiveness of the state, the strategic and economic importance of
the border, and more importantly the actual presence of the state in
the borderland. Vested interests develop not only among some people
living in the area, but also among the customs officers and the
security officials serving in the area, who get involved in smuggling
of humans and contraband articles. They facilitate smuggling which
becomes more profitable than checking it. But before we think of soft
borders as a solution, we must have an effective system of identity
cards in place. None of India's international borders can be termed as
friendly borders, not even the Indo-Nepal border. Crossing that does
not require an Indian passport or visa. The recent political
developments in Nepal and the growing clout of the Maoists in that
country have serious repercussions for India's national security.
India-Pakistan border is a hostile border and the rest come somewhere
between these two extremes. For obvious reasons, the management of
demographic imbalance and border management has to be approached
differently on different borders. There is no common solution for all
of them. The oft-repeated phrase, sealing of the borders, has little
meaning when applied to most of the country's international borders.
Either the terrain is such that the sealing of borders through
physical measures is simply not possible, or the ground situation does
not allow these measures to succeed for political reasons. Ultimately,
the success of border management will depend on how easy or difficult
it is for the illegal immigrant to cross into the country and find
shelter and employment, and for the government to detect their
presence. It is not an easy task. Linkages of ethnic kinship have made
the borders porous and difficult to secure. Moreover, ethnic,
religious or linguistic affinities of communities have encouraged
constant cross-border movements.
Measures like border fencing need to be implemented in sensitive areas
that are used as common routes for illegal infiltration. Improved
surveillance and effective river patrolling is essential. An efficient
network of police and revenue intelligence needs to be built up.
Officer in charge of the local police posts should be made responsible
for the detection of illegal migrants. His annual assessment report
should contain a separate column about his performance in this regard.
The Police Station should have a separate register for recording
information about illegal migrants, the routes through which they
infiltrate the places of shelter and employment.
We live in a troubled neighbourhood. The region is economically
backward, politically unstable and, more importantly, two of India's
most populous neighbours are rapidly being dominated by the jehadi
forces. The concentration of madrassas and mosques, set up with
foreign funding, in the border areas where demographic composition has
undergone a radical change cannot be ignored. The Task Force on
Internal Security had noted with concern the spread of the ISI
networks in the Siliguri Corridor. Political parties must appreciate
the seriousness of the situation and stop playing partisan politics
with it. No internal or external strategy can succeed in the absence
of a broad political consensus among the political parties. India's
not very friendly neighbours are aware of this weakness and ruthlessly
exploit it to pursue their own national agenda of breaking-up India
and subverting its political and security system. Poor governance by
politicians pursuing populist policies and non-performing civil
services have created an explosive situation. Migrations cannot be
totally stopped, but they can be drastically reduced if both the pull
and push factors are managed in an imaginative way, and all political
parties broadly agree to take a united stand against illegal
migrations.
|
