No Love Lost Between Neighbours
Scholars
as well as Indian officials are convinced that there is a strong
anti-India sentiment running through the Bangladeshi bloodstream. They
are not wrong in this thinking. But they, especially the Indian
officials, are blind to the strong Bangladesh-hatred in the Indian
bloodstream. However, hatred between the two peoples, which is stirred
up and inflamed by the two ruling predatory bourgeois classes in the two
countries, fails to complete the true picture in this case since it
means fraternity and shared history are not taken into account.
Aside
from friendliness, there are many bitter issues between Bangladesh and
India, such as water sharing, building dams unilaterally, trade
imbalance, etc. Border is only one of these and it both hurts and
bleeds. It is one of the bloodiest borders on earth. The number of
deaths occurring on this border makes it look like a perpetual war
situation, or at least very far from peaceful neighbourly relations. The
‘war situation’ phrase is not a false projection of reality. Meenakshi
Ganguly, South Asia director at Human Rights Watch, in the wake of
excesses committed by the trigger-happy Indian Border Security Force:
“The border force, with a peacetime mission of preventing illegal
activity, is acting like it is in a war zone, torturing and killing
local residents.”
There are border disputes between countries all over the world. But the dispute remains confined within the governments or at most armies. It is a different case for the Bangladesh-India border. Brad Adams, Asia director at HRW, in an article in The Guardian (India’s shoot-to-kill policy on the Bangladesh border, 23 January 2011) accused the Indian security forces of ‘turning the border area into a south Asian killing field.” And it is a one-sided killing field with full immunity for the Indian security forces. The harassed, tortured and murdered are mainly poor Bangladeshi people. Children also could not escape death at the hands of the Indian force. The body of the 15-year-old martyr Felani hanging on the barbed wire fence in 2011 actually depicted the reality of the situation.
The Indian government meanwhile also tries to hide the information about the killings, calling them by softer names and terming the victims as ‘miscreants’, ‘intruders’, etc. The governments of Bangladesh do no more than make some whimpering noises, because the victims are very poor people, unlike the people who own riches and power. Only the media pick up some news and make a noise about these killings. Though such large numbers of deaths on any border, at a rate of about two persons a week, is unthinkable in the modern civilised world, no one has made an attempt to make it an international issue before New York-based Human Rights Watch did it in their 2010 report, ‘Trigger Happy: Excessive Use of Force by Indian Troops at the Bangladesh Border’. This 81-page report revealed that about 1,000 people had been killed in the first decade of the 21st century. Brad Adams deplored in his above-mentioned article, “Sadly, Bangladeshi border officials have also suggested that such killings are acceptable if the victim was engaged in smuggling.”
After this report was published, outright killings on the Bangladesh-India border dropped but beatings, torture, and other kinds of harassment and deaths in custody increased to a phenomenal level. To the Indian and pro-Indian sides, most of the discourse regarding the border killing revolves around whether the Bangladeshi persons are at fault of illegal intrusion or not. But this is a fake debate, the real point is whether any government or security force can go on killing at such a rate on the border of a neighbouring state. Raising other issues is to divert attention from the real point. A simple question is: Does smuggling or illegal intrusion warrant death even for children anywhere in the civilised world? The BSF acts as judge, jury and executioner on this crucial point, Brad Adams wrote.
It seems at first sight that Pakistan is India’s number one enemy and China is number two. But neither of these two countries has shed as much blood as Bangladesh at the hands of the Indian soldiers. Since a year after the birth of the country, which India helped to become independent not without some fear of several of its states having inspiration of freedom from it (Bangladesher Rajnoitik Jotilata, Ahmed Sofa, 1977), India has irresponsible with regard to its claims of being a friend to the people of Bangladesh, though the fate of development of these two countries is tied together. It has even built a 2000-mile long barbed-wire fence along the border. There is a gulf of difference between a good fence and a barbed wire-fence with trigger-happy guards by it; if the former makes a good neighbour, the latter makes a neighbour into an enemy.
There are border disputes between countries all over the world. But the dispute remains confined within the governments or at most armies. It is a different case for the Bangladesh-India border. Brad Adams, Asia director at HRW, in an article in The Guardian (India’s shoot-to-kill policy on the Bangladesh border, 23 January 2011) accused the Indian security forces of ‘turning the border area into a south Asian killing field.” And it is a one-sided killing field with full immunity for the Indian security forces. The harassed, tortured and murdered are mainly poor Bangladeshi people. Children also could not escape death at the hands of the Indian force. The body of the 15-year-old martyr Felani hanging on the barbed wire fence in 2011 actually depicted the reality of the situation.
The Indian government meanwhile also tries to hide the information about the killings, calling them by softer names and terming the victims as ‘miscreants’, ‘intruders’, etc. The governments of Bangladesh do no more than make some whimpering noises, because the victims are very poor people, unlike the people who own riches and power. Only the media pick up some news and make a noise about these killings. Though such large numbers of deaths on any border, at a rate of about two persons a week, is unthinkable in the modern civilised world, no one has made an attempt to make it an international issue before New York-based Human Rights Watch did it in their 2010 report, ‘Trigger Happy: Excessive Use of Force by Indian Troops at the Bangladesh Border’. This 81-page report revealed that about 1,000 people had been killed in the first decade of the 21st century. Brad Adams deplored in his above-mentioned article, “Sadly, Bangladeshi border officials have also suggested that such killings are acceptable if the victim was engaged in smuggling.”
After this report was published, outright killings on the Bangladesh-India border dropped but beatings, torture, and other kinds of harassment and deaths in custody increased to a phenomenal level. To the Indian and pro-Indian sides, most of the discourse regarding the border killing revolves around whether the Bangladeshi persons are at fault of illegal intrusion or not. But this is a fake debate, the real point is whether any government or security force can go on killing at such a rate on the border of a neighbouring state. Raising other issues is to divert attention from the real point. A simple question is: Does smuggling or illegal intrusion warrant death even for children anywhere in the civilised world? The BSF acts as judge, jury and executioner on this crucial point, Brad Adams wrote.
It seems at first sight that Pakistan is India’s number one enemy and China is number two. But neither of these two countries has shed as much blood as Bangladesh at the hands of the Indian soldiers. Since a year after the birth of the country, which India helped to become independent not without some fear of several of its states having inspiration of freedom from it (Bangladesher Rajnoitik Jotilata, Ahmed Sofa, 1977), India has irresponsible with regard to its claims of being a friend to the people of Bangladesh, though the fate of development of these two countries is tied together. It has even built a 2000-mile long barbed-wire fence along the border. There is a gulf of difference between a good fence and a barbed wire-fence with trigger-happy guards by it; if the former makes a good neighbour, the latter makes a neighbour into an enemy.
Courtesy: Dhaka Courier
