India and Bangladesh: Mending fences?
Ever since the Awami League came to power India and Bangladesh are exploring ways to converge and iron out their mutual differences. The political will in New Delhi and Dhaka is clearly visible. In keeping with the present camaraderie the recent declaration by the Home Secretary GK Pillai, of India considering a 'unilateral no-firing' on the border for one year, has been a cause for much cheer for both. The issue of firing at border by the Indian Border Security Force (BSF) has been a major irritant in Indo-Bangla relations. Its resolution needs immediate attention to bolster the already growing stronger bilateral ties.
Violent incidents on the border and subsequent loss of lives have been a recurring cause of concern to both the neighbours. Undoubtedly, the Bangladeshi media's preoccupation with this phenomenon has been far more noticeable than in the Indian media. More often than not the BSF has been accused of opening fire. There is hardly a week that goes by without Bangladeshi media referring to such an incident. In the beginning of April one report referred to the security forces of India and Bangladesh holding a flag meeting over one such incident on the Goburda border in India.
Given the nature of terrain and overlap of villages and enclaves of India and Bangladesh the problems at the borders are many. Porosity is an important factor leading to smuggling and illegal movement of not only contraband items but also of livestock and human. Despite border patrolling, illegal trade has not experienced much decline if the state border trade statistics are any indication. The cross-border nexus of the smugglers are deeply entrenched, transcending nationalities and local loyalties. The BSF often resorts to firing to control the illegal trade and movements usually taking place after dusk. It is a pity that hundreds of lives have been lost in previous years. Both Indian and Bangladeshi citizens living on the border areas including those involved in smuggling have been victims of indiscriminate firing by security forces. Indeed going by the Indian Home Ministry data, more Indians are killed on these border incidents than others. Thus, the continuation of this meaningless violence was baffling to all and urgently begs resolution.
The use of non-lethal weapons by the BSF has been discussed at various levels within India. Suggestions for using rubber pellets or stunt spray gun were often rendered, but none have been implemented. Thus the Indian decision to consider modalities to ensure no border firing for at least a year couldn't have come a day too early. But its actual implementation on the ground will be the real test. As in the past, several laudable decisions have often been taken at higher levels, but rarely taken to its logical conclusion. The overseeing of such a decision at the ground level would remove one of the serious issues which have often vitiated the bilateral atmosphere. A resolution of this irritant would reduce the tension not only at the borders considerably, but also beyond that (for instance, to blunt the strident anti-Indian mode of Bangladeshi media).
The issue of open easily crossable borders are fraught with problems. The problem is not one sided either. While one of the problems surrounding that of border firings may be moving towards desirable goals, the other Bangladeshi cause of concern has not figured in the bilateral parlance. The reference is to the issue of border fences. Ever since, in 1987 when India decided to fence some locations along Indo-Bangladeshi international border, (at present 2,859 km have been fenced out of the sanctioned 3, 783 kms) Bangladesh has been upset. For Indians the influx of Bangladeshi across the border was a problem eluding any long-standing solution. The decision to fence was aimed at primarily curbing this menace along with other illegal cross-border commodity movements. This decision was not without a political cost bilaterally. Bangladesh always perceived it to be 'an unfair' move. And despite the passage of years Bangladesh is yet to be reconciled with the idea. For Bangladesh such a move reflected not only India's lack of trust towards its neighbour but also meant overlooking and disregarding what is largely considered as a historical trend of free movement across the subcontinent. Nevertheless, with the fences being built on Indian soil with Indian resources, there was very little Bangladesh could do to stop the process. It protested about these fences being defence structures, which are not permitted between the neighbours within 150 yards from the zero line.
As is well known, India has been for long raising the subject of illegal migration from Bangladesh into India. Similarly, Bangladesh in recent years has counter argued about Indians crossing borders and working illegally in Bangladesh. For every list of insurgents and their camps that Indian has forwarded to Bangladesh, Bangladesh has reciprocated with a list of criminals and terrorist who have escaped arrest within Bangladesh and fled the borders into India. Thus Bangladesh's objection to building fences seems mired in ambiguity. The fences would certainly in small measures address all those issues. Indeed, according to India's BSF the fences are working. They numbers of Bangladeshis that are detained at the borders have decreased over the years. Arguably, fencing decision also has not seen much domestic consensus in India beyond the security establishment. The fences have effectively cut-off many Indians from rest of India. They not only need ID cards to enter their own land but also are subject to the timings of the border gates, thus causing sever inconvenience to many. Also many Indians have argued that fences do not really deter Bangladeshis from crossing over to India as many continue to use the riverine routes. The fences themselves are subject to environmental decay and are also easily violated. It is widely recognised that undocumented migration takes place through agents who are engaged in well organised racket, which involves bribing at several points along the border on both sides. The effectiveness of the building border fence at the huge costs (Rs.28, 800 million has already spent) thus is often been questioned both inside and outside India.
In the absence of any other more effective measures India is likely to continue with its fencing programme at present. However, its promise to check the border firing can be seen as a strong step towards ironing out the differences between India and Bangladesh. There remain several outstanding issues regarding the common borders, but the cessation of border firing is critical to the growing trust and faith between two friendly neighbours.
The author is a Research Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies & Analyses, New Delhi, India.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments