India can still have bilateral discussion with B'desh on any number ofother areas, provide aid (which it does, I think), help in technology,agricultural etc. I am of the opinion, that a developed (at least asmuch as India) Bangladesh would be the ideal neighbor. >That is the essentia premise of bilateralism - you give up on certainfronts to >gain >on others While, I generally agree with this concept, one would hope India doesnot have to give up land and property for illegals in the 'give up'front just for the sake of bilaterism. There ought to some sense offair trade. --Ram
On 6/8/05, Roy, Santanu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> The answer the simple. Bangladesh can gain a lot on other economic dimensions - trade concessions, investment incentives - that India may be in a position to offer. That is the essentia premise of bilateralism - you give up on certain fronts to gain on others. Indians are rather bad at it - particularly in their dealings with the smaller neighbors. This is the unilateralism Sanjib is talking about.> > Santanu.> > > -----Original Message-----> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ram Sarangapani> > Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 10:28 AM> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Assam] Unfriendly neighbourhood> >> >> > > India's unilateralism in dealing with illegal immigration> > shows a> misunderstanding about its power and influence, says> > Sanjib Baruah> > I am not sure I understand this. What kind of benefits would> > Indiaachiev! e to bring B'desh into this influx problem? Why> > should Indiagive a bargaining chip to B'desh, where none existed?> > One can fathom what B'desh would bring to the table in such> > negotiations:> > (a) Give illegals the rights to settle down in India(b) Give> > them guest-worker ids(c) The GOI/GOA must provide aid and> > comfort to the illegals> > IHMO, it would not be in B'desh's interest to stem the flow> > ofillegals into India. From their point of view, the more the> > merrier.All that does is to shift the social and moral> > responsibility ofcaring of B'deshi's poor citizens to India:> > ie shift the burden ofpoverty onto India.> > > The US-Mexico dialogue on illegal immigration to the United> > States of America> is a case in point. Under the leadership> > of its president, Vicente Fox, Mexico> has successfully> > pushed for a say in US immigration policy. It has asserted> > its> moral right in the well-being of Mexican immigrants in> > the US, irrespective of> their! legal status. ..............> > The fact that the Bush administration capitulated to> > pressures fromMexico is only an example of politics creeping> > into a soundimmigration policy. It makes political sense to> > garner the Hispanicvote bloc. It has nothing to with what in> > the long run is good for theUS.> > Further, earlier experiments by previous US administrations> > of generalamensties to illegals has not had any effect on the> > flow ofimmigrants. In fact, it can be argued, that programs> > such asguest-workers or amenesty only encourage more illegals> > to come across,because some future administration may> > actually grant themcitizenships.> > > India's way of dealing with the problem has been mostly> > unilateral. Thus when> reports appeared of an exodus of> > suspected Bangladeshis from Assam for> fear of vigilante> > action, following a local youth group's call for an economic>> > boycott, Bangladesh promptly threatened to seek the> > intervention of the> Unit! ed Nations Human Commission for Refugees.> > This is just a lot of doublespeak on the part of B'desh. On> > the onehand they claim there are no illegal B'deshis in> > India, on the otherthey seem rather sensitive to reports of> > vigilante actions. If thereare no illegal B'deshis in India,> > why is B'desh worried aboutnon-B'deshis?> > I haven't thought this thru, but IMHO, India can have some> > discussionwith B'desh. But the discussions have to be> > centered on B'desh'sresponsibility to make sure it secures> > its borders, and also acceptthe illegals when deported.There> > is very little reason for India to capitulate. B'desh> > shouldconsider themselves lucky that India is not giving them> > the bill forthe huge expenses involved..> > >India's unilateralism on > illegal immigration may reflect a> > similar>misunderstanding about its relative power vis-à-vis> > its neighbours.> > So, what is the author's solution?--Ram> >> >> >> > On 6/8/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED] edu> wrote:> >> > http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050608/asp/opinion/story_483841> > 8.asp> > The Telegraph (Calcutta) Wednesday, June 08, 2005.>> > > UNFRIENDLY NEIGHBOURHOOD> > India's unilateralism in> > dealing with illegal immigration shows a> misunderstanding> > about its power and influence, says Sanjib Baruah> > India is> > hardly alone in facing the problem of large-scale illegal> > immigration> from a neighbouring country. But unlike some> > other countries, it is yet to> realize the value of> > cooperation with the source country. India has mostly> stuck> > to a unilateral course of action. Yet bilateral cooperation> > has produced> good results in other parts of the world.> >> > The US-Mexico dialogue on illegal immigration to the United> > States of America> is a case in point. Under the leadership> > of its president, Vicente Fox, Mexico> has successfully> > pushed for a say in US immigration policy. It has asserted> > its> moral right in the well-being of Mexic! an immigr!> > ants in the US, irrespective of> their legal status. Measures> > taken by the US on illegal immigrants are part of> Mexican> > political debates — not unlike debates generated in> > Bangladesh by the> Indian treatment of their compatriots. It> > is partly in response to Mexican> pressures that George W.> > Bush has proposed a Temporary Workers Program> that will give> > amnesty to a large number of illegal immigrants.> > India's> > way of dealing with the problem has been mostly unilateral.> > Thus when> reports appeared of an exodus of suspected> > Bangladeshis from Assam for> fear of vigilante action,> > following a local youth group's call for an economic>> > boycott, Bangladesh promptly threatened to seek the> > intervention of the> United Nations Human Commission for> > Refugees.> > One can hardly blame them. In Operation Pushback> > in the Nineties, suspected> Bangladeshi illegal immigrants> > were rounded up and deported even though> Ban- gladesh had> > ! not agreed that the people were Bangladeshi citizens. They> we!> > re simply left in the no-man's-land between the two countries> > with the> Border Security Force pointing guns at them from> > one side and the> Bangladesh Rifles doing so from the other.>> > > There are important differences between the US situation> > and India's. Very> few of India's poorer countrymen carry> > identity papers. Many of them move> around in search of> > livelihood. It would be dangerous to go by looks and> decide> > that a new group of people in town are Bangladeshis. Giving> > policemen> the right to ask for identity papers is a sure way> > of bringing harassment to> them. On the other hand, a highly> > compromised system of obtaining official> documentation> > effectively puts on fast-track the process of an illegal>> > immigrant becoming a citizen with voting rights. This has few> > parallels in the> world.> > Most suspected Bangladeshis> > fleeing from the Dibrugarh area of Assam,> accor! ding to> > reports, were workers in the construction industry — working> > at> brick kilns and building sites — and!> > rickshaw-pullers. From random> conversations with people in> > these occupations in Assam it appears that a> significant> > number are seasonal migrants. They come in increasing> > numbers> from other parts of India as well as from Bangladesh> > in response to the> massive labour demand in north-east> > India's booming construction industry.> The Assamese> > discourse on illegal Bangladeshi immigration assumes that> > all> illegal migrants, as before, are potential settlers and> > citizens, but the reality> may be quite different. There is> > now a transnational grid of seasonal> movement by the> > labouring poor in south Asia and Bangladeshis are certainly>> > a part of it.> > However, to save themselves from harassment,> > seasonal migrants from> Bangladesh have to seek the> > protection of powerful political patrons and they> try to get> > some form of ! official documentation as proof of citizenship.> > Were> legal status in India as temporary workers — like the> > ones applicable to> Mexicans in the US — available to !> > them, one wonders if they would have had> an interest in> > claiming citizenship. Indeed, a transnational legal regime> > for> temporary workers — something that can be established> > only with> Bangladesh's cooperation — might significantly> > reduce the demand for political> patrons and the market for> > false documents to prove citizenship. Making such> a status> > available could also reduce the anxiety of many Assamese and> > other> north-easterners about the impact of illegal> > immigration on the state's future> demographic and political> > balance.> > Of course, there is much that can be done about> > illegal immigration that does> not depend on cooperation with> > Bangladesh. India's laws, for instance, could> target and> > penalize the contractor, the brick-kiln owner, the> > house-builder or> t! he land-owner who prefers employing> > illegal immigrants because they are> cheaper and less likely> > to assert their rights. Historically, the incapacity of the>> > Assam government to protect public lands from encroach!> > ments — be it> forests or the flood plains of the Brahmaputra> > -— has been a major factor in> attracting immigrants to> > Assam.> > Apart from the political trouble this has caused,> > the state's cavalier attitude to> its responsibilities as> > custodian of public lands has significantly worsened the>> > region's environment and quality of life. The incapacity to> > hold on to public> lands has also created the political space> > for vigilantism. In western Assam,> for instance, the fact> > that many "Bangladeshi" victims of Bodo violence were>> > settled in lands that are legally-speaking reserved forests,> > has made it> impossible to resettle them after the violence> > ended. This has also created a> dangerous example in the> > region of the effec! tiveness of vigilante action to> deal with> > the illegal encroachment on public lands by "Bangladeshis".>> > > India's reliance on unilateralism in dealing with illegal> > immigration may reflect a> misunderstanding about power and> > influence in the world of internationa!> > l> relations today. The political scientist, Joseph Nye, uses> > the metaphor of a> three-dimensional chess game to describe> > the contemporary world. There is> the traditional level of> > hard military power, the second level of economic power> and> > influence, and a third level where Nye places migration along> > with currency> flows, the media, the internet and> > transnational movements of various kinds.> Countries that> > wield power at one level may be quite ineffective at> > another.> > Thus, while the US may be the only superpower in> > terms of hard military> power, it does not have the same> > status at the second level, where soft> power counts for a> > lot. And at the third level, where ! non-state actors have>> > more influence, the most powerful of state actors can be> > quite powerless. Nye> is critical of those in charge of> > shaping US foreign policy today for playing only> at the> > first level and assuming that military firepower alone can> > win victories> without engaging the world at the other two l!> > evels. India's unilateralism on> illegal immigration may> > reflect a similar misunderstanding about its relative> power> > vis-à-vis its neighbours.> > The author is visiting> > professor, Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi.> > >> > __________________________________________________> Do You> > Yahoo!?> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam> > protection around> http://mail.yahoo.com> ----- End forwarded> > message -----> > > > >> > _______________________________________________> Assam> > mailing list> [email protected]>> > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam> > Mailing> > list FAQ:> http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/as! sam-faq.html> To> > unsubscribe or change options:>> > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam> > > >> > _______________________________________________> > Assam mailing list> > [email protected]> > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam> >> > Mailing list FAQ:> > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html> > To unsubscribe or change options:> > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam> >> _______________________________________________ Assam mailing list [email protected] http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam Mailing list FAQ: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html To unsubscribe or change options: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
