Photo: India-Bangladesh border check post |
IBU
SANJEEB GARG
One
again, the Indian government has hit a roadblock in
its attempt to introduce to parliament legislation that would enable a land
swap deal with Bangladesh
to take place. That is a shame, for the bill—the India-Bangladesh Land Boundary
Agreement—has implications not only for foreign relations but also for larger
questions of human rights, the right to livelihood and even the larger contours
of what constitutes foreign policy in India today.
The
bill in question called for India
to exchange 111 of its enclaves in Bangladesh
in return for 51 Bangladesh
enclaves in India .
Under the agreement India
would give up claims for just over 17,000 acres of land which will be
transferred to Bangladesh .
In turn Bangladesh would
cede around 7,000 acres, which would then join Indian
territory .
The
deal would not only end a historical thorn in the bilateral side, it would also
open a new era in the relationship. India
often suffers a “perception problem” in the eyes of its neighbors, which often
view India
with suspicion because of its size, economy and military might. That in turn
encourages them to turn to China .
The land swap deal would go a long way to improving India ’s local image.
A
healthy relationship with Bangladesh
would have other economic benefits. India
could seek from Bangladesh
as a goodwill gesture transit rights to its northeast, bringing development to a
struggling region. A deal could also revive the moribund South Asia Growth Quadrangle (SAGQ), comprising India ’s north east, Bangladesh ,
Nepal and Bhutan . And a
deal would give a pre-election boost to a Bangladesh
government that has generally been favorable to India .
A land
swap agreement would also give citizenship rights to close to 52,000 people:
37,000 on the Bangladesh
side and close to 15,000 on the Indian side. These stateless people, often
victimized, would finally get rights and privileges as citizens, to the benefit
of India ’s
human rights record.
This
deal could particularly benefit the North East and Assam . Resolving the land issues
would enable borders in these areas to be secured. India
would be able to talk officially about the issue of migrating Bangladeshis, a
thorny problem for Assam
for nearly three decades that will only grow with climate change.
Despites
these benefits, the legislation has faced numerous hurdles, particularly
accusations that India is
selling off land to Bangladesh .
Not unexpectedly, ground zero for the opposition has been the northeastern state of Assam. Any policy initiated by New Delhi towards Bangladesh
needs to take the sensibilities of Assam into account. In addition to
the historical immigration issue, there is Assam ’s
proximity to Bangladesh and
the region’s own troubled history with India ’s neighbor, extending back to
the 1970s.
So the
protests and marches against the alleged sell-out of Assam are not surprising, nor are
they completely groundless. There is a genuine feeling in Northeast
India that the central government often takes it for granted.
Hence, there is a need to engage the people of Assam on a more direct level to
talk about the benefits of the swap and any possible ramifications. Assam has a
vibrant civil society, which should be engaged on this issue. In short, it is
time for some public diplomacy.
On a
broader level, this is an opportunity for India to adopt a new model for the
21st century, one that recognizes the changing nature of diplomacy. As their
self-identity grows, India ’s
states and its people want a greater say in how India frames its relations with its
neighbors. The land swap deal is an opportunity for India to adopt a new foreign policy
discourse that engages the states and the public, while giving the Northeast a
chance to participate in the rewriting of its own history.
First
published in The Diplomat, September 3, 2013
Ibu Sanjeeb Garg has recently completed the civil service examination
and is slated to join the Indian Railway Traffic Service
No comments:
Post a Comment