The main discourse in Assam today is of the children-of-the-soil being pitted against the so-called “illegal Bangladeshis”. The term, which is sadly gaining casual usage, is erroneous, not to mention pejorative. As a professional historian, I can confidently speak of the artificiality of the construct of “legal” and “illegal” people in India. And as an “ethnic Assamese”—a term coined by Sanjib Baruah, a well-known Assamese political scientist based in the US—I am horrified by the reckless display of violence to establish Assamese superiority.
Hiding behind the discourse of rights in “our home”, we want to deny others their basic rights as human beings. By referring to people who don’t share our religion or language as “illegal”, we are dehumanising them and ceasing to think of them as people like us. A human is condemned and reduced to nothingness by one word—“illegal”—implying that his very existence is criminal. Even the British did not refer to us, their colonised subjects, as “illegal”; they’d use all kind of names—‘thugs’, ‘badmashes’, ‘miscreants’ and ‘junglees’—but never “illegal”.
It’s a term not used in Indian constitutional or nationality law. The Indian Constitution, one of the finest documents, guarantees rights to all within the nation and is extremely benign toward non-citizens and foreigners. In India, citizenship is based on blood and not birth; but there’s a provision of naturalisation after 12 years of residence. It is ironic that political groups who stir up the “illegal immigrants” discourse have failed to educate people of their rights to become naturalised citizens. One must assume that the unwillingness to solve the problem by constitutional means is because it serves other purposes.
A similar “anti-illegal immigrant” situation prevails in Arizona, US, where I live. In 2010, Governor Jan Brewer signed a bill called SB1070. This bill gave law enforcement officers the power to stop, detain or arrest an individual they suspect is an illegal immigrant. Impetus for SB1070 is attributed to shifting demographics, leading to a larger Hispanic population, increased drugs-related violence and a struggling state economy. For two years, critics of the legislation tried to expose the corrupt practices that underlie the bill, claiming it encourages racial profiling and unlawful detention of people in prisons that are privately run and earn federal dollars for housing inmates. President Obama has publicly expressed concern that Arizona’s anti-immigration law may lead to racial profiling and even infringement of civil rights. The Arizona law is not dissimilar to one in Saudi Arabia, where all non-Saudis are expected to have on their person the resident permit or iqama. “One cannot even step out to throw garbage without carrying the iqama in case the Saudi police ask,” an Indian engineer who lived in Saudi Arabia once told me. Curiously, one cannot apply for an iqama without a Saudi sponsor. A foreigner living and working in Saudi Arabia is at the mercy of his sponsor. The bottomline on all these punitive anti-immigrant measures is an anti-human message. If Assam does not want to follow the example of Arizona and Saudi Arabia in dealing with their so-called “illegal immigrants”, it needs to rethink its own future.
In the 1980s, the upsurge against the “illegal immigrants” led by the All Assam Students Union (AASU) culminated in the Assam accord in 1985. The accord proposed criminalising the presence of immigrants who came after 1971. However, the Asom Gana Parishad (AGP) (constituted by AASU leaders), who came into government after the election of 1986, failed to execute the task of documenting the immigrants.
Why? Politicians, whoever they are—AGP, Congress, BJP, AIUDF, Bodos and all others—owe the people of Assam and the rest of India an honest answer for their machinations. They have played too many games and fooled too many people. We had remained silent. But now they are manipulating the human condition, normalising brutality and horror, and dehumanising us. We must speak back to them and claim our due as human beings because human dignity is our right.
The people in Assam are angry. It is evident in the street protests and marches. But the Assamese people must also realise that we are part of a human community. As an immigrant myself, like many thousands of other Assamese, who live, work and enjoy rights as naturalised citizens in America, I am keenly aware of the “immigrant condition”. Many in Assam have their family and friends living here in America. They know about their relatives’ hard but fulfilling lives, and they are proud of their successes. Many of these naturalised Assamese-Americans, like other Indian-Americans, also enjoy the benefits assured to them as Persons of Indian Origin (PoI) and Overseas Indian Cards (OIC). Although, this is not equivalent to dual citizenship, holders of these cards are entitled to rights and benefits within India. In the US, the Assamese-Americans enjoy a wide range of rights. Every year, they gather together to celebrate Bihu. Assamese parents work hard to impart their language and culture to their American-born children. They try to arrange their marriages with Assamese partners. I would be appalled if tomorrow some of my White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) friends and neighbors denied me the right to speak Assamese or practice my religion with my community. It will be an infringement of my basic civil rights, a denial of my past, my heritage and my humanity. When Assamese people expect the right to enjoy their own culture and religion wherever they are, why should they think that others should relinquish their right to their culture and religion in Assam? If speaking in my own mother language, Assamese, with my parents and elders is considered good manners, why should I expect that Bengali children should speak to their parents and elders of their community in Assamese, and not in their own language, Bengali? We must want for others what we want for ourselves. That is a basic rule of human tolerance and accommodation.
The reckless use of the term “illegal” in Assam for some groups of people is belied by the complexity of our linguistic chauvinism and a sense of threat, a sense that the future is bleak. These fears make us take recourse to violence, which Assamese, as a community, otherwise abhor. My mother used to say, “The Assamese will never be violent if we remember that our religio-cultural foundation rests on Sankardeva and Azan Pir. Both of them were proponents of the dignity and love that binds people together.” I continue to believe in my mother’s conviction that the Assamese are not a violent people and that we will not turn to violence to resolve our problems. Like my mother, another human voice, Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace Prize winner, states it categorically, “No human being is illegal.” We should take care to recognise this ideal. One person cannot decide the legality of another person’s existence. People are not things that can be labelled, categorised and disposed of. We have to find humane ways that uphold ours and others’ human dignity to resolve difficult and critical issues of living together and side-by-side.
(The writer is Hardt-Nickachos Chair in Peace Studies and professor of history at Arizona State University.)
This is in response to the idealistic little piece by Yasmin Saikia (In The Beginning Was The Loaded Word, Sep 17). Well, wake up Ms Yasmin. We aren’t in some utopian land flowing with milk and honey. For good or for bad, our ‘not so humane’ leaders (who were sadly unlike you) had agreed to certain territorial lines, and we are here on the Indian side. Now, it’s for each nation to take care of its citizens. While it’s true that many innocents may have been caught in the crossfire of communal tension, it’s the fault of our lawmakers who have let the situation get this far—facilitating illegal immigration with a hungry eye on votes that has resulted in massive demographic change in the Northeast.
Saikia has rightly depicted the sorry state in Assam relating to the Bodo-Muslim violence. Though some reporters try to give a biased view, human rights violations against Bengali-speaking Muslims have been occurring there since 1979. Let all sections uphold the tenets of humanity.
Mazedur Rahman, on e-mail
Does Saikia have the courage to visit Silchar, obtain revenue records of 1981 from the district authorities of Cachar district, and try to identify the villages marked on the revenue maps on the Silchar-Mizoram NH? It’s not possible anymore, as the 9-10 villages have been gobbled up by Bangladeshi migrants. Now, a continuous 40-km stretch of Bangladeshi settlements exists on both sides of the NH from Silchar till Vairengte, the first village of Mizoram. One can also check electoral rolls from the 1980s, to easily identify illegal entries.
Charan Dewry, Guwahati
That she is professor of Peace Studies, is that what qualifies her to write this piece for Outlook? Addressing the problem by addressing the ‘goodness’ in human beings and intellectualising it is perhaps good for the discipline called Peace Studies. We need that as well. But I do think she needs to visit those areas to understand the history, the geography, the demography, the population, the traditional economies, landholding patterns and the daily influx of people without any kind of legal papers, whose insecurities make them offensive and violent, among an otherwise traditionally peace-loving people. There’s a difference between an immigrant with legal papers and security and a job, as Yasmin Saikia is, and one without any of the above, who is trying to get his/her security by might of numbers. What would we do if we were a peaceful community of 10,000 and suddenly had to deal with a daily influx of 500 refugees into our settlement? I just came back from quite an intense and rigorous tour of the area. You welcome the ‘atithi’ in, but would you give away your home to him and make him master of the house?
Pritha Sen, Gurgaon
In an ideal world there would be no borders, no countries and no travel restrictions. But this is not an ideal world. There are legalities, and, failing that, illegalities. Come on, it is not hard to understand, even for a history prof.
Ashutosh Kaul, Toronto
There is a saying in Telugu: “If you can, grab the neck. If you can’t, fall at the feet.” It’s the same with Saikia. When it’s clear that the problem is of Bangladeshis illegally settling in India, she tries to change the definition of legality by trying to make it seem that both parties to the issue are the same!
“How can a human being be ‘illegal’?” The same way a human can be communal!
Rakhal Ghosh, Philadelphia
Yasmin Saikia’s views (In the beginning..., Sep 17) are just sad. The situation in Assam is not a topic for research sitting on the other side of the planet. Incidentally, on her central premise, the case is not of human beings being termed ‘illegal’, but of illegal migrants. Minus requisite documents, even in her country of residence, Ms Saikia must surely know that she too would be termed ‘illegal’.
Advocating humanity, as Yasmin Saikia does in the case of Bangladeshi immigrants in her piece (In the beginning..., Sep 17), is a fine thing. But to live with the reality of problems caused by illegal migrations is quite another.
Jitu Phukan, Dibrugarh
The fact remains there has been reckless migration into Assam; in fact, the worst sufferers are the migrants themselves. Indeed our country, and the neighbouring ones from which we get immigrants, should work out a solution. Intellectual attempts to understand such problems are blind to ground reality.
Tanmoy Sharma, Delhi
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT