As in the past, our bleeding heart liberals have displayed utter insensitivity to the welfare and security of India’s 1.3 billion citizens and have taken up the cudgels on behalf of a bunch of illegal immigrants—the Rohingyas—many of whom have links with terror outfits in Pakistan and pose a grave threat to national security.Putting the welfare of these illegal immigrants before those of Indian citizens, their sympathisers demand that Indians set aside their apprehensions about their security and share the scarce resources available in the country with them.
We need to first examine some of the arguments being advanced on behalf of the Rohingyas in the Supreme Court and in the public fora. It is said on behalf of the Rohingyas that they are refugees and “not mere illegal immigrants” and that they are entitled to protection under many international conventions to which India is a signatory including those based on the principle of non-refoulement. This is factually incorrect. Rohingyas are not refugees and not entitled to the rights available to such individuals. They are like millions of Bangladeshis who have illegally entered India and spread themselves across the country. Further, India is not a signatory to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. Nor is India a signatory to the 1967 Protocol Relating to Refugees. The obligation of non-refoulement (non-return) is only binding on states that are parties to the 1951 Convention.
Another recurring theme in the arguments advanced against deportation of Rohingyas is the reference to the Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III of our Constitution. Most of these rights are bestowed on Indian citizens and not on all and sundry. Since some articles refer to “persons”, while most others refer to “citizens”, there are attempts to obfuscate the issue by juxtaposing “persons” for “citizens” and demanding all kinds of rights for illegal immigrants.
The plea of the Rohingyas that the right to equality before the law under Article 14 and protection of life and personal liberty enshrined in Article 21 has merit because both bestow this right on “persons” and not just on “citizens”. But there are arguments that seek to equate these illegal immigrants with citizens and this must be challenged. For example, the omnibus rights in Article 19 are rights exclusively conferred on citizens including the right to freedom of speech and expression, to move freely within the country, and to reside and settle in any part of the country.
Apart from the constitutional provisions, it is the duty of the Indian state to protect the rights of all its citizens. Because of its porous borders, India has been a victim of cross-border infiltration for several decades leading to gross distortion in the demographic profile of many border districts. Also, is there any need to remind anybody of the number of civilians and members of the security forces who have been killed by these terrorists who have crossed into India?
As regards the Rohingyas, the national security apparatus has sufficient inputs to indicate that their presence within the country has serious security implications. There is information that some are linked to Pakistan-based terror organisations and have moved into cities like Jammu, Delhi and Hyderabad. These individuals prose a grave threat to our security. There is also evidence of them using fake Indian identity documents and mobilising funds through the hawala route.
Before jumping to conclusions and holding India responsible for the plight of the Rohingyas, it is important to take stock of the situation in the disturbed Rakhine state in Myanmar, as assessed by the Advisory Commission on Rakhine State, headed by Kofi Annan, the former secretary-general of the UN. Going into the history of the conflict, the Kofi Annan report said that shortly after Myanmar won its independence in 1948, “a Muslim ‘mujahidin’ rebellion erupted in Rakhine, demanding equal rights and an autonomous Muslim area in the north of the state.” The rebellion was eventually defeated but the Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) revived the armed struggle later. Thereafter, the Harakat al-Yakin (later Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army or ARSA) attacked government forces in October 2016 —“it was one of the largest Muslim attacks on government forces in living memory”. On the Rakhine side, non-state armed groups of both nationalist and communist stripes had fought the Myanmar Army. Is it prudent to look the other way when people who have their own armies and who have fought such bloody communal wars, infiltrate into India? Don’t we have enough problems already?
The Kofi Annan commission suggested various measures to bring down communal tensions including measures to sort out the messy citizenship. The Indian government has rightly supported the Kofi Annan report and PM Narendra Modi has called for a solution based on peace, communal harmony, justice, dignity and democratic values. India has rushed emergency relief material to Bangladesh to deal with the influx of refugees into that country.
While it is true that India has traditionally been hospitable to people in distress, the primary responsibility of the Indian State is to protect its citizens. Any action or policy that places the well-being of citizens in jeopardy must be summarily rejected. The government must have a citizen-first approach, identify and deport the Rohingyas before things get out of hand. The government should not pay heed to these bleeding hearts—especially resident non-Indians and citizens of other nations—who lack the courage or the common sense to lecture their own nations but seek to besmirch the name of the world’s largest democracy and the world’s most diverse, hospitable and liberal nation.
A SURYA PRAKASH
Chairman, Prasar Bharati
Email: suryamedia@gmail.com