Internal & External Threats to Indian Borders

Introduction The modern nation-state is the product of the concept of territorial sovereignty. The independence of a nation-state, in all its endeavors, was a prized possession in the world characterized by colonialism. All a nation-state wanted was independence in its political, social and economic activities. The nationalist sentiments are inherent in successful nation-states. However, the nation-state is less successful in those situations where the population is fragmented between several large groups who do not wish to surrender portions of their different identities in order to produce a national identity. The majority of nation-states with such problems seem to be the artificial creations of war and/or colonialism rather than the product of 'natural' evolution. India, too, is a result of such historical happenings and despite being successful till now, which is surprisingly amazing, has been facing a lot of security threats, both from external and internal sources. India became independent on August 15, 1947 when it was divided into two nations, Republic of India and Islamic Republic of Pakistan (Islam-i Jamhuriya-e Pakistan), divided on religious lines - India being Hindu-dominant but a secular state, whereas Pakistan being Muslim-dominant and an Islamic state. Internally, at the time of independence, India was not divided in states as we see it today. The states were formed by the States Reorganization Act in 1956 where the state boundaries were drawn along linguistic lines. There have been many addition and deletion to the list since then. Presently the Indian structure has 28 states 6 Union Territories (UTs) and 1 National Capital Territory (NCT). The states are (in alphabetical order): Andhra Pradesh (earlier, part of Madras), Arunachal Pradesh(earlier UT, state since 1987), Assam (renamed Asom), Bihar, Chhattisgarh (created out of Madhya Pradesh, in 2000), Goa (occupied in 1961, later UT, state since 1987), Gujarat (state since 1960, bifurcated from Bombay), Haryana (created out of Punjab, in 1966), Himachal Pradesh (earlier UT, state since 1971), Jammu & Kashmir (special status until 1957, since then state), Jharkhand (created out of Bihar, in 2000), Karnataka (earlier Mysore), Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra (state since 1960, bifurcated from Bombay), Manipur (earlier UT, state since 1972), Meghalaya (earlier UT, state since 1972), Mizoram (earlier UT, state since 1987), Nagaland (earlier UT, state since 1963), Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim (annexed as state in 1975), Tamil Nadu (earlier Madras), Tripura (earlier UT, state since 1972), Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal (created out of Uttar Pradesh, in 2000), and West Bengal. The Union Territories are (in alphabetical order): Andaman & Nicobar, Chandigarh (UT since 1966), Dadra & Nagar Haveli (since 1961), Daman & Diu (since 1987), Lakshadweep, and Puducherry (since 1962). And Delhi (formed in 1991) is the National Capital Territory. Externally, the country has 15106.7 km of land border running through 92 districts in 17 states and a coastline of 7516.6 km touching 13 states and union territories. India’s total number of islands is 1197 which accounts to a stretch of 2094 km additional border or coastline. Major international boundaries India share are International Border (IB) and Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan; Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China; among others. India’s external boundaries have been of a shifting nature, redrawn quite a number of times, mainly after wars with Pakistan in 1947, 1965, 1971, and 1999; and with China in 1962. Excluding Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Delhi and Haryana, all other states of India have one or more international borders or coastline and can be regarded as frontline states which are very much important from the border management point of view. Below is a list of the length of India’s land borders with neighboring countries. Management of Borders in India Border management is one of the important aspects in India’s internal as well as external security. Central Police forces perform various jobs during emergencies to maintain internal security of the nation. These police forces are engaged in various quarters of the country for the security arrangement. For example the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) is responsible for the protection of the industries from any damage or security. Likewise, the National Security Guard (NSG) is a Contingency Deployment Force to tackle all facets of terrorism in the country while the Border Security Forces (BSF) are deployed near international borders to protect the land from infiltration and other related matters.
There are seven police forces under the Home Ministry of the Union Government. They are: Indian Police Service (IPS), Assam Rifles, BSF, CISF, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Indo-Tibetan Border Police, and NSG. Besides there are independent Police Forces of different states, UTs and cities; various intelligence agencies like Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), CBI (at national level), CID (at state level); and Para-military Forces like Railway Protection Force (RPF). Apart from international border and coastline, all states have well defined borders. Further addition or elimination of areas to or from a particular State or UT are made whenever necessary, on the basis of the amendments of the constitution. All types of state border disputes are resolved amicably by the centre. The constitution provides under Articles 2 and 3 that; the Parliament may, by law, admit, establish, or form a new State; and it may increase or decrease the area, and/or alter the name or boundaries of any State, under Constitutional restrictions. The states of Jharkhand, Uttaranchal and Chhattisgarh were created, in 2000, under the same Constitutional provisions. Threats to Indian territorial boundaries In the field of external relations, two neighboring countries stand out, meriting continuous scrutiny and caution. There have been violent ups and downs in India’s relationship with them. Looking at China first, its core concern is maintaining its integrity, territorial or otherwise, while it moves dynamically forward to build up its economic, political and military strengths. It seems to it that its strongest challenges will emanate from the US, seen to be encircling it from all directions with the help of its allies, and wanting to force a democratic wave within China, also targeting for loosening of its hold over Tibet and Xinjiang. In the game of diplomatic chess that has emerged China wants to ensure that no lending hand is given to the US by India. It seeks to achieve this objective by keeping India off balance. It has developed Pakistan as its Israel against India, extending nuclear and missile technology, all directed 100% against India. More than collaboration with the US, China fears India over the possible roles it can play around Tibet. As long as fires of Tibetan nationalism burn in Tibet and a Diaspora of over 100,000 Tibetans, mostly well educated and politically aware, with Dalai Lama providing a focus, shelter in India, China will view India with grave suspicions. There is no way by which India can succeed in removing such mistrust from the Chinese mind. While the resulting state of unease may not lead to a war as in 1962, it certainly blocks progress on the border settlement and withdrawal of territorial claims such as over Arunachal Pradesh and Aksai Chin. As of today, one may not be off the mark to state that China India relationship will remain a hostage to China’s crisis with Tibet. The threat from Pakistan is altogether of a different kind. It is not an exaggeration to say that this threat commenced from the day Pakistan came into existence. It was inherent in the two-nation theory, propounded anywhere in the world for the first time, to divide a multi-religious and multi-cultural nation, on a religious basis. An impossible task had been attempted, considering the size of India and its population, religion wise. The attempt succeeded in carving out a religious majority area, already existing, as a new nation, but the rump India still remained a many layered multi-religious and multi-cultural society. The two-nation theory encouraged Pakistan to lay a claim over J&K State. Beginning with tribal incursions of late 1947, Pakistan has fought several wars to wrest the state out of Indian control. A proxy war continues even today. From the Pakistani view point there is no solution to the Kashmir question other than its amalgamation into Pakistan, a position which India can never accept, since any such scenario can ignite a chain reaction of separation in India. The problems between India and Pakistan will thus, remain insoluble, until Pakistan modifies its commitment to two-nation theory. The prospects for such a change are absolutely minimal, because demolition of two-nation theory means that Pakistan loses its raison-de-etre. The Pakistani designs against India have created a vast range of threats. Border-activities never lessen. There is always an itch to break into Indian Territory. Almost all movements within the country, agitating against the centre for political reasons have received support by way of finances, training, arms, guidance and shelter from Pakistani intelligence, ISI. Within Pakistan itself Islamist groups have been created or supported by ISI for sabotage, subversion and terrorism in India. ISI with its surrogate Wahabi groups is now targeting Indian Muslims to get them involved in questionable activities. The activities of groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Taliban (not only to India, but now even to Pakistan and Afghanistan) have always been a serious threat. Whilst under US pressure Pakistan has somewhat relented on its support to Islamic radicals operating against the US, it has abstained from a similar downsizing of its activities against India. What may one expect from the new configuration in Pakistan after the recent elections? There is no evidence yet that key changes are in the offing. The President retains all his powers as of old. He derives his strength from the military which, while it seems to have moved backstage, has not shed any substantive power. A new era will not dawn in Pakistan until the military is truly confined to the barracks. Till that happens, perceptions of threats from Pakistan must remain as before. Latest developments show a degrading political situation in the country which doesn’t augurs well for our country. On India’s borders exist other failed or failing states which create deep security concerns. Recent elections to the Constituent Assembly (CA) in Nepal have pitch-forked the Maoists in the leadership position for the first time for government formation. Their immediate objectives in the foreseeable future can be expected to be consolidation and management of CA deliberations to facilitate their smooth assimilation with polity and power in Nepal. Externally, their objectives will be to redefine Nepal’s relations with neighbors and other powers. Inevitably it will mean loss of India’s pre-eminent position in Nepal, with scrapping of mutual privileges. Covert support to Indian Maoists had not been on their agenda in the past and is not likely to be there in future while the process of consolidation is on. But transformation is never without some turbulence and hiccups. As they arise, they will need to be settled with foresight and patience. Unease with Bangladesh is not likely to end as their response on two major Indian security concerns has been negative, illegal infiltration into India and promotion of cross border terrorism. Bangladesh’s asymmetry with India and its extreme sense of inferiority vis-à-vis India contribute in a big way to these problems. The demographic aggression is a direct result of the pathetic poverty of Bangladesh. The perforated and a long border that India shares with Bangladesh make it easy for infiltration into our country. The history of creation of Bangladesh also contributes to a heightened militancy activity in the region. Infiltration has significantly altered the population patterns in the border areas of India and constitutes a long-term risk. The Bangladesh situation calls for a holistic approach from India, combining a compassionate approach to help in its developmental objectives with firmness where security gets compromised. In Srilanka, India is caught between the devil and the deep sea. The best solution for the crisis there would have been autonomy to Tamils in the North East provinces in a federal setup with a guaranteed and substantive devolution of power between the provinces and the centre. The moment seems to have been missed and Srilanka appears to be seeking a military option. India is left painted in a corner, unable to take any initiative on behalf of either side. After Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination, public opinion in India is not very sympathetic towards the LTTE but if misfortune continuously chases Srilankan Tamils, there will be calls to come out with a response. And with US stepping in, the situation becomes more of a diplomatic chess now. The internal scene in India is also not free from anxiety on the threat front. Growth of Naxalism has been declared by the Prime minister to be the top internal security problem of the country. Roots of Naxalism, now known as Maoism, predate independence and now affect about 150 districts spread over 13 states. It has grown to this strength on account of cumulative wrongs, absence of social and economic reforms to ensure human dignity, justice and democratic rights to the rural and forest tribal populations of the country. The movement is seeking to establish a contiguous area from Karnataka to Nepal border to set up a compact revolutionary zone and is now well militarized. It will be a mistake to think that the movement can be countered by armed means alone. Ways have to be found to include the Maoists in the main stream and to fulfill the rising expectations of the rural and tribal people through better governance and a paradigm shift in administrative and development strategies, to ensure a better delivery. Naxal and Maoists activities are major threats for the national security in the recent period. The government has been acting on the same. The Government of India in association with the state governments has adopted a multi pronged strategy to combat the problem of Naxalism in the country. There are continuous talks going on with the Naxal outfits. The government has also tried to solve the grass root level problems concerned with the people. It has accelerated economic development, increased employment opportunities, removed or reduced socio-cultural alienation of the people and has also {text:bookmark-start} {text:bookmark-end} broaden effective anti-naxalite police actions. Subversion is another form of threat the Indian State is facing from several quarters. In J&K it takes the shape of a proxy war led by militant outfits operating from the safety of sanctuaries in Pakistan, at the behest of the Pakistani establishment. Despite the so called peace process between India and Pakistan, the thrust in this assault remains as sharp and purposeful as before. It is expanding and making inroads into the rest of the country. It wants to transmute itself into what has been dubbed as New Terrorism, mindless destruction of lives and property, merely for spectacular results. Its foreign promoters are eyeing the Indian Muslim community as a fertile field for recruitment of agents. The Pakistani masters try to distort faith by sowing concepts that such terrorism is ultimately a service to the wider community. This in turn promotes sectarian tensions. It is not clear whether the dangers inherent in this Pakistani strategy have been fully comprehended or conceptualized in India. The recent Deoband fatwa, outlawing terrorism, while laudable, does not go deep into the question, whether doctrinal injunctions create a mindset disfavoring growth of liberalism which will offset terrorism. The Muslim community in India needs to be encouraged to examine why it remains out of step with contemporaneous concepts and ideas that can ensure such virtues as gender equality, freedom of expression and keeping religion and state out of each other’s way. There has also been ever-increasing demand for autonomous land from various other quarters. In the east, Gorkhas has been increasing the pressure for creation of Gorkhaland. Sikhs in Punjab had been demanding for Sikhistan, similar to Pakistan, since independence, though it has died down in recent past. Down south, Telengana farmers had been demanding for a separate state of Telengana. Besides, various other ethnic tribes have been demanding recognition and inclusion in mainstream. Though Indian Government has to respect their demands for upliftment but it must not give into their divisive and/or secessionist demands. The turbulence in the North Eastern states of India is another form of subversion, orchestrated by foreign agencies, notably Pakistani. The entire region is a difficult terrain which is little cutout from mainstream India. The existence of ethnic homogeneity, across ‘artificial’ boundaries, contributes to territorial conflicts there. No doubt the militants in these states, principally Tripura, Assam, Manipur and Nagaland have long standing local grievances but there is an ongoing effort in most cases by the Central Government to deal with these through dialogue and counter insurgency. Cross border connections, guidance, financing and arming often put a spanner into such efforts. Conclusion Maoism and foreign subversion pose strong challenges but the idea that is India remains strong. Nobody can say that India is not an admirably successful example of a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-lingual and pluralist entity in motion. It is strikingly amazing that India has not wilted under the threats it faces from different quarters. But the risk of that happening is increasing by the day. If all the security issues, that India faces, test it together, it is almost certain that the existence of India would be in jeopardy. India have to contend with ever-increasing threats from failing states around it, with growth of modern terrorism which can strike virtually anywhere on any scale. Internally, India has to contend with reducing nationalist sentiments and increasing regional affiliations, increasing secessionist movements and conflictual situations arising due to tensions between different ethnic-groups and religious groups. The interplay of politics and corruption and absence of good governance, a must for efficient security, remains a big blot on India’s record and add to the existentialist threats facing India. India and her national leaders have to see that situation does not deteriorate too much. Otherwise, it would be very easy for the country to slip into political crisis like most of its neighboring countries, which does not augur well for our Republic of India. Dean, Gary (1999) The development and future of the nation-state in http://okusi.net/garydean/works/nation-state.html [viewed on 05/03/2009] Pan India Network’s main portal www.indiaonline.in, Pragati Infosoft Pvt. Ltd., http://indiaonline.in/Profile/defense/Security.asp [viewed on 03/03/2009] _Constitution of _India (2008) released by Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice, in http://lawmin.nic.in/coi/coiason29july08.pdf [viewed on 08/03/2009] Manorama Yearbook 2007, Chief Editor: K. M. Mathew, Publisher: Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd.