Abstract
The Government of India decided to fence the entire India–Bangladesh border to prevent the illegal immigration from Bangladesh and to prevent the cross-border illegal and antisocial activities. Since the year 1986, the Government of India started the initiative to construct the border fencing in phase manner. The single wire border fencing which was created in the first phase has been replaced by the composite type of barbed wire border fencing a few years ago. Now the border fencing along the international border between India and Bangladesh has become a structural barrier for the Indian families living at the Country’s territorial edge. The families trapped in the geographical space between actual line of partition and the border fencing are living a restricted and deprived life within the limited land.
This study is basically focused on the impact of the border fencing on the citizenship rights of the Indian fenced out families. This article will discuss how the defensive policies of the Government are affecting the citizen’s rights at the border regions of the country and subsequently resulting in displacement.
Introduction 1
After the establishment of Bangladesh as an independent country in the year 1971, the international border of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh had been redefined again. For the establishment of Bangladesh as an independent country, the then government of India and the Indian Army played a major role. Since then both the countries are maintaining a very peaceful international relationship. But in the matter of territory and border issues both the countries are equally sensitive and aggressive. In the past few years, there were many incidences in the border areas where both the defence personnel and civilians of both the counties got affected severely.
India is the seventh largest country in the world and third largest in Asia. India is sharing 15,106.7 km of land border with the neighbouring countries and a coastline of 7,516 km including island territories. India is sharing its border with Bangladesh (4096.7 km), Pakistan (3323 km), China (3488 km), Nepal (1751 km), Bhutan (699 km), Myanmar (1643 km) and Afghanistan (106 km). All total by seven neighbouring countries, India is surrounded and sharing international border which includes both land, maritime and river borders (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2016, p. 37). But the longest border is with the small country of Bangladesh, which is around 5 per cent of the size of India. With the length of 4096.7 km long border India–Bangladesh border is the fifth longest border in the world. The present day territory of Bangladesh consisted three main sections: those were East-west Bengal border, the Sylhet-Assam Border and the border separating the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) from India (Murayama, 2006).
The North Eastern Region of India consists of the eight states, namely, Assam, Manipur, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Tripura and Sikkim, which covers 8 per cent of the country’s land mass and 4 per cent of the country total population. Approximately 99 per cent of the 6387 km border of the North Eastern Region is International border with the neighbouring countries. In total the region shares about 2700 km border with Bangladesh, 1643 km with Myanmar, 1345 km with China and 699 km with Bhutan (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2016, p. 10).
Management of such a long international border is not an easy task for any country. In India, the Department of Border Management deals with the management of the international border. To ensure the better security at the border, the Department of Border Management involved in activities, such as construction of border fencing, floodlighting and border road construction along the Indo-Pakistan and Indo-Bangladesh border, construction of roads along the Indo-China and Indo-Nepal border. Apart from that the international borders are manned by different border guarding force, for example, Border Security Force (BSF) in the Indo-Pakistan and Indo-Bangladesh Border, Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) in Indo-China border and Assam Rifles in Myanmar border. India–Bangladesh border is highly porous in its nature and checking of illegal migration from Bangladesh is one of the biggest challenges for the Border Security Force and the Government of India (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2016, p. 37). Taking the advantage of the porous nature of the India–Bangladesh borderland, the different extremist groups took up this borderland as their breeding ground. Insurgent groups mainly from the North Eastern region of India for example United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA), the All Tripura Tiger Force, the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB) and the National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) had their camps in different locations of Bangladesh (Das, 2008, p. 372). Similarly, illegal activities and smuggling became the major issues to be checked in this borderland. People from both the countries are involved in different anti-national activities. Frequencies of arm smuggling, cattle smuggling, human trafficking, drugs and gold smuggling were happening in almost throughout all the border-sharing states of India and Bangladesh.
Looking at the serious complexity of the border and the emerging antinational and criminal activities, the Government of India finally decided to create border fencing in the entire Indo-Bangladesh border. The construction of the border fencing along the Bangladesh border in Assam was strongly supported as there was already a huge public demand to prevent illegal migration from Bangladesh (Sammadar, 1999). The demand for the international fencing was echoed in 1964, but after the Assam agitation in 1980s, the momentum for the demand increased for the complete sealing of the India–Bangladesh in Assam borderline (Begum, 2011). There were different political groups and student’s organisation who took up the border issue and continuously demanding since long time for the complete sealing of this border and deportation of the illegal migrants.
Migration was not a new phenomenon in India. Since the British period and subsequently after the partition in 1947 and again after the establishment of Bangladesh as a new independent country, the migration happened in overwhelming numbers. During 1911 and 1931, more than a million Bengali-speaking people migrated to Assam and again in 1951 half a million people migrated to Assam and it was not stopped thereafter, it was a continuous process (Bhardwaj, 2014, p. 62). Till 1971, this kind of migration was not considered as illegal as it happened historically. After the establishment of Bangladesh as an independent country in 1971, the year has been considered as a cut-off year. Those who migrated after 1971 and still migrating from Bangladesh are considered as illegal migrants (Bhardwaj, 2014, p. 62). The push and pull factors because of which the migration is happening from Bangladesh to India in different time period are of different nature (Sinha, 2010, p. 323). Some of the major push factors are political upheavals, successive waves of hostile situation especially during and immediately after the partition in 1947, religious persecution, intolerance, demographic pressure, environmental crisis and adverse economic situation (Das, 2008, p. 371).
The creation of the border fencing was initiated in the year 1986 and it has been completed in phase manner. The first phase of the fencing was initiated in the west Bengal border and in the second phase starting from the year 2000, the construction work was carried out in Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura (McDuie-Ra, 2014, p. 82). But still there are some places where the border fencing work is yet to be completed. The fencings which were created in the initial stage were of singled wire. Subsequently to strengthen the security measures, the single wire fencing was replaced with the composite type of barbed wire border fencing in the entire Indo-Bangladesh borderland. From Table 1, it can be observed the phase-wise sanctioned and completed fencing work in the five states of India. Still this border is not completely sealed because of land disputes between the two countries, geographically unsuitable terrain and dense forest at various locations.
It is true that after the creation of the border fencing, there is a decline in the incidences of criminal activities across the border. But at the same time due to the creation of the border fencing, the border villagers got affected in various ways. Following guidelines of the Land Border Agreement of 1974 between India and Bangladesh, neither of the countries was supposed to create any defensive structure within 150 yards that is approximately 137 meter from the actual line of partition. It is important to mention that the partition line between India and Bangladesh was drawn by Sir Cyril Radcliffe who was the Chairperson of the then Bengal Boundary Commission and he was assigned to draw the partition line just before the independence of India in the year 1947 (Banerjee, 2001, p. 1505). The partition line drawn between India and Pakistan by the Boundary Commissions is not considered as an outcome of proper practical field study (Das, 2008, p. 367). Recent scholarship suggests that Radcliffe’s award was biased towards safeguarding the British interest. It was tried to ensure that the Commission and its final decision have a justifiable rational of deliberation rather than one outcome of a decision that is taken in hurriedly (Chester, 2009). Many claimed that the partition line was drawn just by drawing lines on old map as a result this arbitrary line of partition cut crossed through the densely populous villages, market places, agricultural lands and even through houses.
Status of Border Fencing
Study Area
The five states of India, namely, West Bengal (2216.7 km), Assam (263 km), Meghalaya (443 km), Tripura (856 km) and Mizoram (318 km), are sharing the International Border with Bangladesh (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2016, p. 37). The study is conducted in Karimganj district of Assam. The Karimganj district is located at the Southern part of Assam with a total area of 1809 sq. km, which comprises of different geographical features, such as agricultural plains, shallow wetlands, hilly terrain and dense forest. Karimganj is one of the three districts of Assam which is sharing 92 km of international border with Bangladesh. Out of 92 km long border 41 km of border is demarcated by the river Kushiara and 51 km is land border (National Informatics Centre, n.d.). The other two district of Assam, namely, Cachar and Dhubri, are also sharing the international border with Bangladesh. In total Assam state of North Eastern region of India is sharing 263 km of international border with Bangladesh. It consists of both land border and river border with Bangladesh.
Similar to many other border-sharing district here also the border fencing was created following the guidelines of Land Border Agreement of leaving 150 yards from the actual line of partition, but additionally due to fault of the construction company and due to geographical disadvantages in some location of the border the fencing was created at about 500 meter–900 meter away from the actual line of partition violating the rules of 150 yards. As a result many houses were fallen within the geographical location between the line of partition and the border fencing. In Karimganj district of Assam, there are 10 villages which are partially or completely fenced out after the creation of the border fencing. The villages are North Lafasail, Jarapata, Govindapur, Latukandi, Deotoli, Tesua, Kowerbag, Tilaiya, Jobainpur and Lamajuar and all total there are 140 families who are still living outside the border fencing.
Methodology
The study is conducted considering the fenced out border communities in different location of the border region in Karimganj district of Assam. Primarily the sources of empirical evidences for the study are the in-depth interviews and Group discussions conducted with the people from the fenced out border villages. Apart from that the secondary literature related to borderland study, Government reports and theoretical understanding are bringing in to explore the context of the Indian families living outside the border fencing.
Violation of Citizenship Right
The border fencing created in the borderland of Karimganj district of Assam has been limiting the citizenship rights of the people living outside the border fencing since its creation in this borderland. Under the strict border rules, such as restriction in movements, restriction in availing the welfare services etc., the social, political, economic and civic life of the Indian fenced out communities have been getting ruptured. In one hand when the situation created due to the border fencing displaced many families from their place at the same time there are many families who are still living a restricted life outside the border fencing under the strict surveillance of Indian Border Security Force. These families who are still living outside the border fencing in Karimganj District of Assam are one of the most disadvantageous sections. Economically, they do not have that capability to move inside the border fencing and to settle down in the mainland with their family, so they do not have any other option but to live outside the border fencing and now they are being excluded from different citizenship rights in different ways.
In political and legal theory, citizenship refers to the rights and duties of the members of a nation state (Scott & Marshall, 2009, p. 80). Citizenship has traditionally referred to a particular set of political practices involving specific public rights and duties with respect to a given political community (Bellamy, 2008, p. 3). Now if we look at the political involvement of the people living outside the border fencing, it is merely negligible. They are never considered as active member and always keep isolated from any political activities. Presently they are fenced out so they are hardly informed about the meetings of local level Government.
One of the interviewee
2
from Jarapata village mentioned,
The Panchayat members and the Panchayat President will conduct the village meetings with their own people; they even don’t bother to inform us about any such village meetings. As we are living in this side of fencing so they will never come and announce about such meetings as if we are not the part of their society
Generally, these meetings are organised on monthly basis in the presence of all the voters and the adult members of the villages. But since the creation of the border fencing, no body is bothered to inform the people who are living outside the border fencing, not even the officials of the local Governments.
Similarly the people who are living outside the border fencing are not even bothered about the contesting candidates and the final result of the election. Casting vote is just a way for them to prove their citizenship and to justify themselves as the responsible citizen of India.
As village wise the numbers of families living outside the border fencing is comparatively very less in numbers after the displacement happened since last few years, the election contesting candidates are also do not bother about the numbers of votes from the fenced out villages. It is not a matter for the contesting candidates even if the fenced out villagers do not cast their votes, so the villagers never get the attention from any political groups. As a result of that the people are also deprived of Government welfare services. Another interviewee
3
from Latukandi village stated,
I have been refused Indira Awas Yojana (A housing scheme of the Government of India) as I am living outside the border fencing. The panchayat member asked me to show my own land inside the border fencing, but how is it possible for me to purchase another piece of land to get the government facility when I am dying of poverty
Similarly, another respondent
4
from Govindapur told,
We don’t have electricity, proper drinking water, where as just in the other side of the fencing people have electricity and all other facilities…we have been told that as we are living outside the border fencing so we can not get electricity
The local level Government that is the ‘Village Panchayat’ is responsible to ensure different services under the Government welfare programme and schemes. During the implementation of programmes and schemes, the negligence and biasness of the local level Government is depriving the fenced out Indian families from the basic citizenship rights. It is important to mention here that fenced out Indian villagers in Karimganj district of Assam are living in the borderland without the availability of electricity, without proper sources of drinking water, road connectivity and without any educational and health institutions. All such basic needs are denied by the local government by saying that as their houses are outside the border fencing now, so it is not possible to sanction those services to them. The local Governments have decided their own rules and that results in endless sufferings for the fenced out border villagers. It is not like that the border villagers never challenged the local and the district authority or ask for rehabilitation and compensation but everything went in vain as no proper steps have been taken in this context.
Citizenship is not just the meaning of residing in a particular territory and to obtain some identity cards. It postulates the relationship of belonging to a State by birth or by choice and at the same time to continue that relationship of belongingness. It is not just the sense of belongingness, there is something emotional and spiritual meaning attached to it (Singhvi, 1988, p. 3). Due to the border fencing, the idea of insider and outsider again developed among the community people of the same country who are living in two different sides of the border fencing.
One respondent
5
from Jarapata said,
Our friends and relatives hardly visit us because of the restrictions and required formalities at the border gates. With time everything is changing for us, now our relationship is not that trustworthy as it was before with our neighbours from the other side of the fencing.
Again from Deotoli another interviewee
6
stated,
It feels very painful when knowing the actual facts also many of our own people living at the other side intentionally call us Bangladeshis as just because we are located outside the border fencing now
Gradually, the strong bonding which existed before is now becoming an illusion for the villagers of two sides of the fencing. The sense of belongingness among the community people is no more prevailing as stronger as before it was. Unfortunately, the fenced out community people are getting deprived of the social status and recognitions. Even many people started recognising them as the Bangladeshis just because they are living outside the border fencing. The huge structure of the border fencing is not only weakening the age old sense of belongingness but also diminishing the emotional attachments among the people.
Border Fencing and Displacement
Before partition when there was no concept of division, people were living in a common land generation to generation. They shared common culture, language and societal values. But sudden partition just before independence divided the people and separated them as citizens of two different countries. But still after so many years of partition, even the inhabitants are of two separate nations but there are similarities in their language and cultural practices in most of the places of the border between India and Bangladesh. After the massive population movement in 1947 and again in 1971 during the Bangladesh independent movement, almost every family has relatives on the other side of the border (Rahman & Van Schendel, 2003)
Because of people’s habitation in the geographical location since long time, still there are many border villages where people are living till the arbitrary line of partition drawn by Cyril Radcliffe in 1947. This actual line of partition is also known as the zero line which is demarcated by border pillars. After the creation of the border fencing, those people who were living till the partition line in the border villages in the Indian side are now trapped within the line of partition and the border fencing. It is estimated that approximately 90,000 people in 149 villages got directly affected who were trapped in this geographical location along the Indo-Bangladesh borderland (Prakash & Menon, 2011, p. 34). According to the information from the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Karimganj district of Assam, a total of 362 families were fenced out when the border fencing was created during the initial phase. According to the news media reports, even a few years ago there were 156 numbers of families who were living outside the border fencing in Karimganj district of Assam (The Times of India, May 9, 2012). But when the field study was conducted in the year 2014, it was found that the remaining numbers of households living outside the fenced out land dropped down to 140. Similarly in other States also thousands of families got affected due to the creation of the border fencing. The study conducted by ‘Indo-Bangladesh border fencing affected Resettlement Demand committee of Mizoram’ revealed that the Indo-Bangladesh border fencing will displace a total of 5790 Chakma tribal families that is a total of 35,438 people from 49 villages (Chakma, 2007, p. 411). Similarly in Tripura, it was estimated that 7,123 families will be adversely affected by the border fencing (Das Gupta, 2010, p. 276) and finally 35,000 people were evicted from their home due to the fencing and 11,375 hectares of cultivated land fell outside the border fence in Tripura (Subramanian, 2016, p. 141).
To protect the territory, to prevent the illegal migration or as a security measures whatever the purpose of the border fencing are, the creation of such defensive structure severely affected the border villagers. It is not exceptional even at the India–Pakistan border. It was observed that after the creation of the border fencing in India–Pakistan border huge numbers of border villages were got affected. The military border fencing separated 15,000 people from their land in Jammu and Kashmir State in 2009 (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, 2010). The displacement of people refers to the forced movement of people from their locality or environment and occupation activities. It is a form of social change caused by a number of factors and the most common being armed conflict. Natural disaster, famine, development and economic changes may also be a cause of displacement (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], n.d.). After the creation of the border fencing in Indo-Bangladesh borderland, the Indian families trapped between the actual line of the partition and the Indian border fencing had started facing different problems. The emerging challenges and restrictions due to the border fencing forced the families to be displaced leaving behind their own land, property, home and their own community.
Emerging Problems and the Main Causes of Displacement
The Indian families living outside the border fencing are not allowed to come inside the mainland and to go back to their home on their wish at any time. There are stipulated times fixed for the movement of the fenced out families through the border gates. Every day after 6 pm these border gates are closed and as a result during night time they remain outside the border fencing at the country’s territorial edge. Without any urgent reasons, the border gates are not opened by the Indian Border Security Force in the night time. In case of medical emergency after doing lots of formalities the gates are opened and then only one can get the medical treatment. There are incidences where many families lost their family members who died because of the inability to take the patient for treatment on time.
Living at the country’s territorial edge outside the border fencing is like living at the mercy of the Border Guards of the neighbouring country and different antinational agents. In the 92 km long border of Karimganj, especially in the 51 km long land border where the citizens of the two different country living very close to each other just like their neighbours. But the relationship with the foreign neighbour is not the same as it was before. With time the inhabitants of a locality has been changed and similarly the human relationship too. The strict border rules also a decisive factor in this case as interaction with the foreign neighbours is looked with suspicion by the border guards of both the countries. So in such circumstances in many places of the border the relationship is not good among the border villagers of the border sharing countries. People also do not feel safe as there are many criminal incidences happening from the other side of the border. Miscreants can easily make mockery of the defence system by taking shelter in their own country after doing robbery and stealing in the houses of the Indian families living outside the border fencing. As the patrolling of the Indian Border Security Force generally limited till the border fencing especially during the night time, the fenced out Indian families feel very unsafe to live. As a result many families had already left the place leaving behind their land and property. The situation formed due to the border fencing and because of the unfriendly border rules the fenced out Indian families bound to leave their ancestral place and property. They are displaced from their land where they were living generation by generation since many decades.
In today’s world one of the major challenges is the increasing numbers of internally displaced persons (IDPs). The office for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) defined the Internally Displace person as
person or group of persons who have been forced to flee or leave, their homes or places of habitual residence as a result of armed conflict, internal strife and habitual violations of human rights, as well as natural or man-made disasters involving one or more of these elements and who have not crossed an internationally recognised state border.
The displacement happening in the border villages of India in the India–Bangladesh borderland in Karimganj district of Assam is also Internal Displacement and the main reasons are defensive infrastructure and the defensive policy of the government and which is simultaneously leading to various complicated situations to live at the border specially at the fenced out geographical location. At the same time, the new emerging idea whether it is possible to stay outside the border fencing or is it meaningful to invest any more resources as community infrastructure building as it is already fenced out and when government may vacate the land by force or by giving compensation at any time, excluding the families living outside the border fencing to avail the welfare services. Here, the refusal of services by the local government is because of the uncertainty of the fenced out geographical location after the creation of the border fencing. It is the border fencing which is in one way ensuring the security to more than 1.2 billion Indians but at the same time depriving and pushing back many of our own Country people in a situation of threat and insecurity.
Understanding the Impoverishment Process of the Fenced Out Citizens through the IRR Model
The revised policy adopted by the multinational development banks redefines ‘Restricted access to certain resources in protected areas as a form of involuntary population displacement even when it is not accompanied by physical (geographical) displacement’. This concept has broadened the definition of ‘Displacement’ beyond its usual acceptation as geographical relocation, to include occupational and economic dislocation as well (Cernea, 2006, pp. 8–9). The situation of the fenced out families are also affected mainly due to the imposed restriction in movements and the restriction imposed in accessing welfare services.
In the Impoverishment Risk and Resettlement (IRR) model as suggested by Michael M. Cernea, the eight fundamental impoverishment processes in displacement are landlessness, joblessness, homelessness, marginalisation, food insecurity, loss of access to common property resources, increased morbidity and community disarticulation (Cernea, 1997, pp. 1–45). Now if we analyse the situation of the fenced out families under the lens of each impoverishment process we will find that their condition is just similar to any other physically displaced community.
Landlessness
Due to the creation of the border fencing the land value of the fenced out land has become zero. Nobody is now interested to buy this land as it is at the extreme border and more importantly now it is demarcated out by the creation of the border fencing. Mere existence of the land is not beneficial for the families when it is of no value and of no use. During the group discussion respondents from Govindapur said,
It is very difficult for us to continue with the work of cultivation, we can not bring ploughing machines, there are no proper facilities of irrigation out side the border fence
Again people from other fenced out communities also explained the similar kind of problems faced by them in doing agricultural activities outside the border fencing. An interviewee
7
from Deotoli said in grief,
During the agricultural season we are very much scared of the Bangladeshi miscreants who come and steal our cows and bullocks. Doing cultivation is a very risky job for poor like us in the absence of security
Restriction in bringing ploughing machines across the border gates, difficulties in keeping the bullock because of the threat of stealing by the Bangladeshi miscreants, stealing of agricultural products and so on have demoralised the Indian families and slowly the agricultural activities are also dropping down. The agricultural lands are becoming barren lands without any possibilities of future use.
Joblessness
Due to problems in agricultural production many have already left the profession and many started looking for different other livelihoods activities. Many are working as a daily wage labourer, mason, mason helper but due to time bound restriction at the border gates it is not possible for the bread earners of the families to stick into one job and to go far away from the community in search of better job opportunity. Apart from that the time-bound restrictions across the border gate has limited the scope for better job opportunity. From North Lafasail one respondent
8
said,
There are very limited job opportunities here…the border gate gets closed by 6 pm and so we can not go far away in search of better job. Even we can not go out from our house until the gates are opened in the morning
As the border gates remain open during a stipulated time and finally get closed by 6 pm every day, it is not possible for the fenced out population to go far away in search of job opportunities. If they cannot reach at the border gate before 6 pm, they cannot go to their home on that night because it remains closed in the night time and in the next day morning again it will open. In such a situation getting daily job is a big challenge for the fenced out families.
Homelessness
Though the fenced out families are not homeless but they are living in a very poor housing condition, there are various reasons for inadequate housing condition outside the border fencing.
An interviewee
9
from Jarapata said,
Without permission we can not even bring bamboo for our house repairing, the procedure to get permission to bring any construction and repairing material is very complicated…we are living here in a very bad housing condition
Similarly another respondent
10
from Latukandi said,
We do not get the concrete latrine slab from the local government as we are fenced out…as we can not afford to make it without the support from the government so we are not left with any other choice but to use the bamboo made pit latrines or to go for open defecation
Depriving from availing the housing facility under the Government’s housing scheme makes their condition worst. Additionally due to the restriction in bringing the housing construction material and sometime due to the complex procedure of getting the permission become the barrier for the fenced out families to have a good housing to live.
Marginalisation
The condition of living at the territorial edge, itself makes these border community marginalised and moreover the construction of the border fencing has pushed them more in a condition of marginalisation. Loss of livelihood opportunities thus also results in economic marginalisation. General people’s perception about the identity of the fenced out population as Bangladeshi hinders their social status. When the population of Karimganj district is 1217002, nobody is bothered about mere 140 families who are deprived and unnoticed and socially marginalised.
Food Insecurity
Due to poor economic condition, most of the fenced out families are facing the problem of food insecurity. The children and even the adult members are undernourished.
From Deotoli one respondent
11
mentioned in grief,
I can not manage enough food for my family, so my wife and I skip one time meal so that at least our children can have three meals in a day
There are many such families where the adult members of the family skip one time meal so that their children can have proper food. But even that is not enough for the children to have proper nutrition. Due to poverty, the children are also bound to join the unskilled labour force in the early age. That leads to more serious health hazards for the children. Restriction in carrying more than a designated quantity of food items such as rice, sugar, milk powder and other edible products across the border gates creates more serious implications and food insecurity.
Loss of Access to Common Property Resources
Just immediately after the creation of the single wire border fencing the border villages got divided and that become more prominent after the replacement of the single wire fencing with the composite type of barbed wire fencing and with the strictness of the border rules. The common property of the villages got divided and most of the community resources and infrastructure are now out of the reach of the fenced out border villagers. For example, many schools, market place, religious institute, such as mosque, temple and so on, are mostly in the other side of the border fencing that is inside the border fencing in mainland and as a result the fenced out villagers are not able to access and utilise the common property. Subsequently after the creation of the barbed wire border fencing no initiative has been taken further to establish public and community infrastructure in the divided part of the border villages which is now located outside the border fencing.
Increased Morbidity
There are many incidences of death in the fenced out border villages of Karimganj district, which are primarily due to the unavailability of the treatment facilities and delayed treatment.
An interviewee
12
from Deotoli said in deep sorrow,
I could not take my sister for treatment in the night as the border gate was closed…finally when it was opened by the BSF personnel, it was too late and my sister died without any treatment
Due to the restriction in movements across the border gates during the night time and due to the unavailability of any health facilities within close proximity of the border there are many incidences when someone’s family member faced the immature and untimed death.
Apart from that the prevalence of many diseases due to the unavailability of proper drinking water, inadequate housing and poor hygienic condition in these fenced out communities are a serious matter of concern. There are high prevalence of jaundice, malaria and waterborne diseases specially among the children and aged.
Community Disarticulation
Immediately after the creation of the border fencing by the Government of India, the border villages which cut crossed by this fencing divided the villages into two different parts. With the passage of time, the social relationship and the bonding between these divided communities is no more existing as it was earlier. The community we-feeling and the community sentiment are disappearing with the emerging identity of insider and outsider based on the border fencing. Due to the restriction and strict rules to visit the fenced out villages, the relatives and friends hardly visit their own people in fenced out villages. As a result, day by day the social and interpersonal relationship is getting dismantled and fabricated.
Thus, it can be inferred from the above discussed and analysis that there are similarities between these communities living outside the border fencing and any other displaced communities in terms of their impoverishment, their challenges and day-to-day sufferings in life. However, the present families living outside the border fencing are not physically displaced but the restriction in access and additionally the restriction in movement are limiting their citizenship rights. These violations of citizenship rights are happening in the form of denial of their social and civil rights as a citizen of the country. So a new form of displacement can be observed in the borderland of India–Bangladesh which is resulting out of the creation of the border fencing. The reasons of this form of displacement are primarily because of the security measures taken up by the State at the territorial edge of the country. The security structure, the Border policy and the imposed restrictions are creating such situations due to which the two different forms of displacement are observable at the same time in this borderland. A section is displaced physically and a section is displaced from their rights, whereas the second form of displacement is often unrecognised but can be eradicated by adopting appropriate measures.
Possible Intervention
The barbed wire border fencing, which is created as defensive and preventive measures, is directly creating such circumstances which are hindering the citizenship rights of our own people. Living outside the country’s defensive structure make those Indian families more vulnerable to possible threats that may appear at any time from the border sharing country.
Shri Susheel Kumar, the Secretary of the Border Management under the Union Ministry of Home Affairs recently said that a target has been set to seal the complete border by finishing the barbed wire border fencing along the Indo-Bangladesh border by 2017 (The Hindu, June 25, 2016). But it is also very important to take appropriate measure by the government of India to safeguard the interest of our own people who are trapped between the zero line and the border fencing in Indian Territory. Looking at the situation mainly two suggestive measures can be put forward to address the issues and at the same time continuing with the broader arena of country’s security.
First of all the Government of India should try its level best to convince the Government of Bangladesh so that at the minimum distance from the zero line or on the zero line (Actual Line of Partition) the border fencing can be shifted. As there are human settlements till the zero line in both the side that is till both Indian and Bangladesh territorial edge, so any mutual agreement between the two Governments may be beneficial for both the countries. The construction of the border fencing in the India–Bangladesh borderland resulted in partitioned off 600 sq. km of Indian territory, which is approximately twice the size of the Gaza Strip in Palestine (Jones, 2009, p. 885). If both the countries can come to an agreement then this huge area of land could be saved from being fallen outside the border fencing. Bangladesh will also be able to avoid such situation in future if they want to create border fencing. Settlement through bilateral agreement will be more fruitful in the long run for both the countries and the people living in this border. Recently, the Government of India and the Government of Bangladesh signed the land swap deal and settled the long dispute of enclaves, where the exchanges of enclaves has not only settled historic border disputes but also resolved the identity struggle of many thousands of population and put to an end of daily life struggle. External Affairs Ministry in a statement described 31 July 2015 as a historic day for both India and Bangladesh as ‘it marks the resolution of a complex issue that was lingering since independence’ of India. Around 37,000 people lived in 111 Indian enclaves inside Bangladesh, while 14,000 lived in 51 Bangladeshi enclaves in India. These people are getting citizenship of their own choice (The Hindu, 2015, August 1). The enclaves endured through British colonial rule and the independence first of India and more recently Bangladesh. Most of the people living in the enclaves will be staying where they are, but change their nationality (BBC News, 2015, July 31). It is really a great achievement for both the countries. Keeping in mind this recent achievement, the Government of India should start the process of negotiation with Bangladesh again to resolve the problem emerging from the border rules of leaving 150yards from the actual line of partition. If through political negotiation the Government of Bangladesh could be convinced, the sufferings of the many thousand Indian citizens could be put to an end. In a way India could have saved the fenced out border land of huge area in the entire 4096 km long international border with Bangladesh. The villagers could easily use their agricultural land which is now mostly remaining uncultivated as a barren land.
Second the problems of the fenced out Indians can be resolved by the Indian Government itself if proper implementation of Government Welfare services done without any discrimination. If the State and Central Governments take effective measures then the local Government will be bound to address the issues and they will not be able to deny the services and the basic rights to the fenced out Indian villagers by showing different reasons. If the Government can ensure proper source of drinking water, housing facilities, availability of electricity, basic health facilities and at least the elementary educational facilities at the border area especially in the left out geographical location, then most of the problems could be resolved. Particularly in the fenced out geographical area of Karimganj district of Assam state, there are no schools and any other public infrastructure constructed. So initiative of such community infrastructure building will be helpful for the villagers. But at the same time, it is very important that the Bangladesh Government strengthen their security measures so that miscreants cannot enter in the Indian Territory and create problem. Similarly, it is important to make modification in the policy and rules of the border guards so that the families living outside the border fencing do not feel insecure. The three fundamental concepts of the IRR model as described by Cernea (2000, pp. 3661–3662) are Risk, Impoverishment and Reconstruction and according to him under the reconstruction phase the challenges can be addressed by ensuring (a) from landlessness to land-based resettlement; (b) from joblessness to reemployment; (c) from homelessness to house reconstruction; (d) from marginalisation to social inclusion; (e) from increased morbidity to improved health care; (f) from food insecurity to adequate nutrition; (g) from loss of access to restoration of community assets and services; and (h) from social disarticulation to networks and community rebuilding. Similarly by adopting the strategies of the IRR model, the challenges and issues of the Indian families living outside the border fencing can be addressed. The approach can be adopted both in the cases if the Government wants to bring back these families inside the border fencing or just ensuring all services in the location where they are living now. But for that the government of India should come up with appropriate strategy and implementing mechanism.
Conclusion
The creation of the border fencing was very urgent looking at the increasing illegal and antinational activities across the border. But it is completely inhuman to push back a section of people in our country’s territorial edge where there is no scope for them to progress. We are enjoying our freedom remaining under the protection of the security structure but pushing back a section of people who are already deprived and poor. In some border, village people are not ready to come inside without getting the complete compensation from the Government but the Government is delaying any such decision in this matter. As a result since last 25–30 years, the families are living a restricted and deprived life in this borderland. Living in such a location outside the country’s security structure makes the families more vulnerable to any possible threats. At present both India and Bangladesh are having a friendly and co-operative relation but in case of any emergencies and conflict situation these are the families who will face the dare consequences at the first place. Living at the territorial edge that is also without any security infrastructure will make them the easy target of any possible harm in future, so the government should think about the seriousness of the situation and take appropriate measures to resolve the challenges of the fenced out families.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
I acknowledge the guidance and academic inputs of my research supervisor Professor Bipin Jojo (Centre for Social Justice and Governance, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai) to complete this article.