The global age of time-space compression has been celebrated for bringing about a retreat of the international nation-state system. The fluidity of boundaries in conditions of globality is challenging the congruence of peoples and territories, ending the insulation of political communities. National boundaries, however, continue to assert its traditional function: the protective-military one. This is particularly true of India in its relations with its neighbors.

India shares a land border with Bangladesh extending to 4096 kms. The need for fencing this long border has arisen primarily from its adverse impact on internal security due to the porous border. It became more visible since the 1980s with growing foreign support to insurgencies in north-eastern India. Easy passage across the border has facilitated guerilla tactics of the armed outfits which have their camps in foreign territory. Of equal concern to the security of the nation but one that has been downplayed due to politics of a different kind is the problem of massive influx of illegal migrants. Even a cursory look at official statistics reveals that India is facing the brunt of the demographic explosion taking place in the world's most densely populated country-Bangladesh with a density of 969 people per sq. km. The impact in the north-east has already assumed alarming proportions. Of an estimated 20 million illegal Bangladeshi immigrants, 10 million are said to reside in Assam and West Bengal. However, out of 3.60 lakh cases of illegal immigrants in Assam in the last decade, only 1501 could be deported whereas in the corresponding period 4 lakh Bangladeshis were sent back from West Bengal. The threat to internal security from the unabated immigration can hardly be exaggerated. Various districts have undergone considerable changes in terms of demographic composition. Such shifts in the local demographic balance poses an increased risk of violent conflicts between communities, and its probability is even higher in the north eastern region where resources are scarce.

The idea of fencing the Indo-Bangla border was mooted way back in 1985. Whereas actual work started in 1992, it will be a long time before it is finally completed. The first phase of the project though is nearing completion. The components include construction of 2784 kms of road, 23.8 kms of bridge, and 896 kms of fencing. Till March 2002, according to official records Rs. 1.6 billion had been spent and an additional 6.08 billion is estimated to be spent for completing the remaining portion. The second phase constitutes the greater component of fencing, proposing to cover a length of 2429 kms.

The announcement by the Union Minister of State for Home, Swami Chinmayananda that it would be completed by 2006 has come amidst growing skepticism. Various hurdles continue to stand in the way of the task. The terrain is difficult, unlike in the western border. Frequent skirmishes between the border forces of the two countries have also severely impeded the progress of work. One of the clashes included the Border Roads Organisation and the Bangladesh Rifles. The very first requirement of land acquisition has not been easy in the face of opposition and litigations. Moreover, inadequate demarcation of the border has resulted in enclaves inside each other's territory. In Assam, diversion of funds has been alleged. The biggest challenge presents itself in the form of settlements on the borderline. This aspect needs serious consideration of the policy makers, for the very livelihood of the people are at stake. A proper package of compensation and rehabilitation has to be worked out for people in nearly 200 villages located on the zero line. It would otherwise mean that while the benefits of globalization are being reaped elsewhere, these people are condemned to remain nested in the far end of the country, to become victims of security that national borders promise to their fellow citizens.

Yet, the hurdles only highlight the urgency for a well thought out comprehensive policy of border management rather than opting for instant responses to specific situations. Strategic commentators often announce that internal security considerations have brought out the significance of border management for the overall strategy of national security. This very assertion, however, still hides the higher weightage traditionally granted to the external component of national security. The limitation of this approach stands exposed in the late realization of the need to fence the border, not so much fuelled by decades of illegal immigration as by the growth of foreign support to insurgency. For the people of the north east, completing the fencing project would best answer a current question - why is it taking so long to complete it if fencing the western sector took only three years?