28 July 2020, NIICE Commentary 5708
Nayanika Dutta
India’s status as a favored refugee destination is evidenced by the steady influx of refugees from many of its neighbors. The Indian legal system does not have a common law for dealing with its huge refugee population. In the absence of any relevant legislation, all current Indian laws, such as the Criminal Procedure Code, the Indian Penal Code, Evidence Act etc refer to refugees. Refugees are dealt on a case by case basis, depending on their national origin and other political considerations.
The political alienation of Rohingya Muslims in post-colonial Myanmar and the currents of violence against them is now widely viewed as ethnic cleansing and human rights violations. In this article, India’s political responses towards the Rohingya crisis are examined and its political and humanitarian dimensions are cross-represented. This article is an honest attempt at understanding the debates surrounding refugee and national security of India in the context of the Rohingya crisis.
South Asian states have experienced refugee movements since independence from British colonial rule. Yet again in 1971, East Pakistan’s division from West Pakistan triggered massive migration across borders. India stands with two other nations in the region – Pakistan and Bangladesh, at the forefront of this inflow, while Afghanistan also has been sending out its citizens as refugees because of the ongoing internal tensions within their state.
According to the United Nations, the estimated number of refugees in South Asia is around 2.5 million. The UNHCR records that India alone hosts around 2,00,000 refugees. Besides wars and persecution, poor economic conditions and climate change have greatly triggered citizens to leave their home countries. India, sharing borders with countries of South Asia along with Maldives being geographically adjacent to India through the Indian Ocean region, has unavoidably been a favored destination for refugees fleeing their own countries.
However, it was only the traditional security discourse that dominated debates which challenged India’s preparedness to handle refugee flows in the midst of global and regional crises as a result of non-traditional securities, such as environmental damage and the subsequent cause and effect relation between environment and economy leading to an environmental-economic split impact.
In 1989, when the Myanmar authorities began to suppress the pro-democracy uprising in their state and roughly 3000 nationals of that country sought refuge in India, the GoI announced that no genuine Myanmar refugees would be returned and would rather be accepted and granted the status of GoI Refugees. Similar was the case with Sri Lankan Tamil refugees crossing the sea in order to reach the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu. The Government of India adopted a clear refugee policy on Sri Lankan refugees and allowed them to enter the country regardless of the fact that the refugees did not have travel documents.
While India is not signatory to the 1951 Convention on Refugees and also to the 1967 Protocol, it is a party to the agreement to a number of United Nations and World Conventions on Human Rights, refugee matters and associated issues, hence its responsibility in relation to refugees stems from the latter. India has also voted in favor of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which reflects the development of all people, citizens and non-citizens alike.
Several other factors have also contributed to the puzzlement of local people because of the lack of concerted effort to handle refugees. Refugees who fear deportation and harsh treatment under the law make efforts to assimilate with the locals by imitating their socio-cultural patterns which further contribute to the building up of insecurities and alertness amongst the local population. A true example to this is the case of Assam where excessive illegal immigration from Bangladesh has agitated the indigenous Assamese for decades altogether. An infiltration of such kind has triggered the struggle for resources, lack of stable economy and employment opportunities and issues relating to identity assertion. In fact, these are some of the causes for active insurgency in the region. The disturbance of the native indigenous population in sensitive zones like the Northeast, in itself is seen as a security threat.
Many scholars have argued that the government’s negligence in formulating effective repatriation agreements have pushed the country into the brink of the debate about having lesser resources as compared to the number of mouths to feed. Along with this posing as a challenge, the internal peace and harmony of the refugee concentrated areas have gone through a rupture as a result of illegal migration induced identity crisis and social unrest.
India has been a victim of terrorism time and again, which is why the security issues continue to be a larger concern. Reports suggest that India has been tapping on the influence of foreign radical groups on the Rohingyas, through its consulate in Rakhine’s capital. India also had warned of a growing presence of Pakistan based and funded groups like the LeT who seek to exploit the Rohingya resentments.
India has also been pursuing connectivity interests with Myanmar to link North East India to the Bay of Bengal via the Rakhine State in the context of a joint project involving the development of the port at Sittwe, the Kaladan multi-nodal project and road construction to connect it to the Northeast of India. The Indian Government feared instability in the Rakhine state as it would negatively affect such opportunities. With that security cooperation between the two countries, especially in dealing with cross-border ethnic insurgency in their shared border regions, India has been careful not to disturb the Myanmar regime. India’s offer of relief assistance was a token of help to the Government of Myanmar as much as it was to its humanitarian concerns in the neighboring region.
India has acted very moderately on this front. Development was seen as a long term solution to this crisis. Most researchers of the South Asian nation suggest that normalcy will be restored if and when the displaced Rohingyas are returned to the Rakhine state. Therefore, India emphasized on Myanmar’s responsibility to develop the state of Rakhine socially and economically. It provided aid and assistance to the Rakhine Development Program to support the returning population. There also emerged a strong need for India to formulate a diplomatic balancing between Bangladesh and Myanmar to address its security concerns as well as keep the goals of the Act East policy alive, while keeping a check on the Chinese influence in the region. The international community should continue to engage constructively with both Bangladesh and Myanmar and manage the situation with restraint considering the welfare and well being of the people of the region.
India has partnered closely with Myanmar and Bangladesh in the security field. The exchange of intelligence is a core aspect of security cooperation to deter terrorist groups from attempting to radicalize the Rohingyas in refugee camps. Myanmar and Bangladesh are both members of BIMSTEC. In this context, positive developments in BIMSTEC may motivate member states to work collaboratively in the field of defense and security. India is motivated to use this platform for the same purpose over co-operations in security and economy.
Considering the nature, size and complexity of the Rohingya crisis, deriving on a regional solution is the only way to tackle this crisis. Coordination and cooperation between regional countries is the way forward. In several ways, India holds similar positions on the Rohingya issue with ASEAN. Both have ramped up socio-economic growth in the state of Rakhine. Both India and ASEAN are mindful that they will be the first ones to confront the repercussions of any terrorist activity arising from the radicalisation of the Rohingyas. Therefore, geopolitics, security and economic interests and humanitarian concerns have been crucial in shaping India’s response to the Rohingya crisis.
