The grave concern shown by LK Advani, the Deputy Prime Minister (also in charge of the Home portfolio) about the illegal immigrants, at a gathering of senior police officials in the Capital has drawn attention to the growing number of refugees that India plays host to, and the security threat emanating from them. Cautioning against the detrimental role of migrants, many have been sent by belligerent neighbours to spread havoc in the country, he said that substantial evidence in this regard has been gathered over the last few months. India has witnessed non-Indians being involved in most terrorist strikes it had to face, including the grievous attack on the Parliament. Urging the authorities to track down illegal migrants in the country, the Deputy Prime Minister in harsh and categorical terms said that India would not tolerate these migrants who, under the guise of asylum, indulge in nefarious activities aimed at destabilizing the nation and jeopardizing its security. Setting aside human rights considerations, he ordered the immediate deportation of these illegal migrants to their respective countries. He said this was in the best interests of the nation and its people. He also mentioned that approximately 11,500 Pakistanis and 15 million Bangladeshis are residing in various parts of the country without proper documents or permits. Their numbers swell each year as they are joined by another 0.3 million Bangladeshis who immigrate through the porous borders of India’s northeast. Assessing the security peril arising out of illegal migrants, he warned that India could ill-afford such lapses in its internal security arrangements. Moreover, with Bangladesh becoming the new haven for Al Qaida activities, a fact noted by the governments of West Bengal and Tripura, this threat cannot be ignored as extreme right wing xenophobia.

The refugee problem is not alien to India. At various times, India has had to grapple with large exodus of refugees arising out of political, economic or climatic conditions in the region (especially in Bangladesh, Tibet, and Sri Lanka). India attracts the largest number of migrants in South Asia because of its location, and economic and political stability. Added to this are the shared ethnic linkages and cultural similarities that enable these refugees to merge with the host population, making detection difficult. Due to resource crunch, many host states are witnessing widespread discontent, especially with the local population loosing out to the more competitive migrants in the job market. However, 9/11 added a new twist to this saga.  The economic threat was subsumed in the larger threat of national security. With terrorism and asymmetric warfare gaining ascendancy, migrants were looked upon with suspicion. Episodes like the Parliament attack, Raghunath temple and Akshardham temple attacks by non-Indians fuelled these suspicions further.

Following these developments, a pilot project for issuing I-cards is being launched in April in thirteen states at a cost of Rs 14 crores (US$ 3 million). The states where the project would be initiated are Jammu and Kashmir, Gujarat, Uttaranchal, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Assam, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Tripura, Tamil Nadu, Goa, Pondicherry and Delhi. This special drive, designed to identify and deport illegal migrants, has opened the Pandora’s Box and raised questions about people who wish to seek asylum from religious persecution in their respective countries? Will India stop humanitarian assistance, as in the case of the 213 Bangladeshis stranded in no man’s land? How will the people staying in India for decades and in possession of ration cards or voter identity cards be treated? How will those who have married Indian nationals be dealt with?

This is indeed a slippery slope as it is difficult to detect the motivations of people for coming to India. However matters can be improved by issuing work permits and establishing a growth quadrangle comprising of Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and India’s northeast. While work permits will provide labor mobility, a growth quadrangle will bring long term benefits to these countries by facilitating the movement of resources like capital and raw materials and enabling development of the entire quadrangle. As far as non-economic migrants are concerned, a case-by-case approach would be appropriate. But special efforts should be paid to ensure that the problem is not given a communal hue, unleashing long-term repercussions.