Part 3: Can India shelter Rohingyas armed with religious agenda?

Central Government’s announcement of deportation of illegal Rohingyas citing security concerns elicited a flurry of responses. The decision which came in the wake of massive exodus of Rohingyas in country with huge religious diversity generated an unprecedented brouhaha. Meanwhile, right activists, liberals, politicians jumped in giving the issue a dangerous spin. Further a petition was lodged in Supreme Court challenging deportation of Rohingyas. A battery of a high-profile lawyers- Fali S Nariman, Prashant Bhushan, Kapil Sibal, Rajeev Dhavan, Ashwini Kumar and Colin Gonslaves teamed up to defend Rohingyas citing Article-14 (Right to Equality) and Article-21 (Right to Life) of Constitution of India. In response government has filed an affidavit in court stating that Rohingyas has terror links and hence their presence can threaten national security. Indeed

While the plight of innocent Rohingyas is a humanitarian crisis, investigation reports of intelligence agencies prompted Indian government to adopt a stringent approach. Modi’s endorsement of military crackdown during his state visit to Myanmar has rattled rights activists and puzzled Bangladesh battling the refugee crisis. But within days, India adopted a four-pronged approach to allay fears of Sheikh Hasina government and address the charges levelled against India by United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) chief.  Under the new multi-dimensional approach, India dispatched relief material to Bangladesh under “Operation Insaniyat”, offered assistance for development of Rakhine state, promised to support Bangladesh in eviction of illegal migrants and working together with Myanmar security forces in cracking down Rohingya militant organization.

Government’s decision of deporting illegal Rohingyas was based on the crucial inputs provided by Indian intelligence agencies which closely monitored the sectarian rivalries between Rohingyas and Buddhists. Reports indicated that LeT was providing training to Rohingya insurgents in Pakistan. Further, to foster unity among disgruntled Rohingya elements Hafiz Saeed formed an organization, Difa-e-Mussalman Arakan and helped the organization to forge links with other terror outfits in Pakistan and Bangladesh. All major militant outfits of Pakistan opened their branches in Arakan-Harkat-ul-Jihadi Arakan/AMM and Tehrik-e-Jihadi Arakan giving a new filip to Rohingya radicalization process. In 2013, terrorists nabbed in Bangladesh also confirmed assistance of ISI to Rohingyas during investigation. Political advisor to Sheikh Hasina, Hassan Togifque Imam told that ARSA has close links with Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen of Bangladesh and LeT of Pakistan and described ARSA as common enemy of India, Bangladesh and Myanmar. He claimed that Pakistan backed Rohingya secession movement since 1969. During 2012-13, Rohingyas through an organized illegal migration channels, settled in various parts of India. A large network of touts and agents facilitated illegal movement into India via Benapole-Haridaspur (West Bengal), Hilli (WB), and Sonamora (Tripura). What makes the entire process so very ominous is planned settlement of these illegal Rohingyas in sensitive areas like Jammu, Hyderabad, Delhi, West Bengal, and Rajasthan. In all other countries including Bangladesh refugees are settled in camps. But it is appalling that illegal Rohingya migrants who have entered India are settled in the hinterlands. As of now India provides shelter to 40,000 Rohingyas out of which 14,000 are reported to have registered with UNHCR. Of them, as per J &K assembly report, 13,400 are settled in Jammu with an interesting split up: Jammu-5,086; Jammu’s Samba district-634, Ladakh-7,664. Islamist organizations are increasingly pushing for settling Rohingyas in Jammu since it is the only Hindu-majority region of J&K while Buddhists are dominant population in Ladakh. J &K is a sensitive region and grappling with external and internal militancy, settling these illegal migrants would not only change the demographic but might turn region into a tinderbox. The state enjoys special status under Article-370 and permanent settlement of foreign subjects will have dangerous repercussions.

Islamist organizations like Jamaat-e-Islami and Shekhawat Centre are helping Rohingya in obtaining necessary documents for settlement. Already thousands of illegal Bangladeshis settled in border states of India are insidiously changing demography of the localities, a marked increase in crimes (drug trafficking, counterfeit currency exchange, arms &weapons manufacture) was reported. Security forces in October 2015, killed two terrorists in South Kashmir and one of them was identified as, Abdul Rehman al Arkani alias Chotta Burmi is a Rohingya. A couple of days back, Delhi police arrested Al-Qaeda operative Samiun Rahman at Shakarpur, a British national of Bangladeshi origin who was on a mission to radicalize Rohingyas. Delhi, Hyderabad and Mewat regions of Rajasthan are communally sensitive areas and their orchestrated settlement by Islamist organizations is at best indicative of larger sinister plan of destabilizing India.

It is unfortunate that rights activists, Libtards and politically parties having conveniently chosen to undermine recommendations of security agencies are now lashing at government ascribing deportation of illegal migrants as “religious discrimination”. It must be recalled that countries like Malaysia, Indonesia which share the same religious identity as Rohingyas refused to shelter them citing security reasons. Bangladesh too has been voicing similar concerns. Interestingly, unlike Tibetan in 1950s Rohingyas are not asylum seekers and hence activists who cite principle of “non-refoulement” must put their arguments to rest. India can’t be accused of being an illiberal democracy as despite being non-signatory of 1951 UN Refugees Convention or its 1967 Protocol, India with its limited resources hosted millions of refugees. India never sought financial assistance from UN for sheltering refugees.

Moreover, political parties by raking the issue of religious identity, stoked the passions of Muslims across the country. Expressing solidarity to Rohingya Muslims, at a huge rally Shia cleric Shabbir Ali Azad Warsi threatened central government over Rohingya deportation. He warned, “Don’t think that Rohingya Muslims are different from Muslims of India. We all Muslims are brothers. Don’t try to evacuate Muslims from Bengal. This is Bengal, not Assam, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh or Muzzaffarpur.” Curiously, leaders like Mamatha Banerjee in to consolidate their vote banks questioned the intent of government and its humanitarian credentials. Ironically, Banerjee never bothered to offer shelter to Hindus persecuted in Bangladesh. This issue invariably brings us to a valid question as why there is no pandemonium over persecution of either Hindus or Buddhists and their settlement at international platforms while the same institutions are brought to their knees if Muslims are threatened?  Even While the heart-rending tales of deprivation, starvation faced by Rohingya is unacceptable, a country with 1.3 billion population can’t risk the fundamental rights of security, equality of its own citizens for humanitarian causes.

It is pitiable that left-congress ecosystem is ready to give a freepass to national security despite serious security threat posed by Rohingyas. But defiant government politely urged the Supreme Court to desist from making any decisions since there can be no compromises on issues of National security. Further, does Supreme Court have jurisdiction over such issues? Meanwhile, Fali Nariman is urging Court to rope in NHRC for strengthening their humanitarian perspective. As pointed by R Jagannathan, may it is time, Supreme Court have a relook at its judgement of 2005 with respect to deportation of illegal Bangladeshis. Supreme court in unequivocal terms in the “State of Arunachal Pradesh V Khudi Ram Chakma” case alluded that countries which host subjects from countries on its territory reserves the right to either refuse or grant certain rights and even has the right to expel them. While subjects of this category are protected under international law, since Rohingyas entered India illegally, their duration of stay can be solely decided by India.

As of now, opposition parties are outcompeting each other in portraying themselves as saviors and peerless humanitarians turning deaf ear to warnings of security analysts and asserting that consolidation of vote banks is their utmost priority.

@ Copyrights reserved.