¶¶Òõ¾«Æ·

THE India-Bangladesh border, stretching over 4,096 kilometres and ranked as the fifth-longest land border in the world, stands as one of the most militarised. While serving as a critical locus for bilateral trade and cultural exchange, the border has also become infamous for its episodes of violence: the killings of Bangladeshi nationals by India’s Border Security Force. These incidents raise important and pertinent questions about the balance between border security and human rights, with India citing the necessity to curb smuggling and infiltration and Bangladesh emphasising the violation of human dignity and international norms.

Ìý

Historical context of the border

THE Radcliffe Line, named after Cyril Radcliffe, marked the boundary demarcated during the Partition of India in 1947. Radcliffe was tasked with the challenge of equitably dividing 450,000 square kilometres (175,000 square miles) of territory, home to 88 million people, along religious lines — primarily between Hindus and Muslims. This division led to the partition of Bengal, transferring East Bengal to Pakistan. In 1971, East Bengal gained independence to become Bangladesh, which continues to share the Radcliffe Line as its border with the Republic of India.

Ìý

India’s perspective on border security: myth or reality?

CENTRAL to India’s border discourse is the issue of illegal migration, particularly from Bangladesh, which has often been framed as a national security threat and a demographic challenge, especially in border states like Assam and West Bengal. However, while the political rhetoric around migration is strong, the actual data paints a different picture.

Ìý

Political narrative vs ground reality

INDIAN political leaders have frequently highlighted illegal immigration to justify controversial policies like the National Register of Citizens, NRC. In 2004, Sriprakash Jaiswal, then minister of state for home affairs, claimed there were 12 million illegal Bangladeshis in India. By 2016, Kiren Rijiju, the then minister of state for home affairs, said the figure had escalated to 20 million. These alarming numbers have been weaponised in public discourse, with politicians blaming immigrants for unemployment and resource scarcity. For instance, Indian home minister Amit Shah once remarked, ‘They are (immigrants) eating the grain that should go to the poor.’

However, a closer examination reveals significant contradictions in these claims. Between 2011 and March 2020, only 15,176 Bangladeshis were granted Indian citizenship — a figure officially provided by the Indian Parliament. Notably, 14,864 of these cases were linked to the Indo-Bangladesh Land Boundary Agreement of 2015, a formal exchange of enclaves between the two nations. Under this bilateral agreement, enclave residents were granted Indian citizenship. Excluding this land swap, the number of Bangladeshis granted Indian citizenship through other means is a mere 312.

This data, indeed, contrasts with the political rhetoric suggesting rampant illegal immigration. It becomes evident that border violence, often cited as a measure to curb illegal immigration, is less about infiltration and more about the clashes of interest involving the Border Security Force and smugglers. Smuggling activities, which invariably involve participants from both India and Bangladesh, seem to persist under implicit arrangements. The BSF’s actions, however, disproportionately target Bangladeshi individuals, raising questions about selective enforcement. Each fatal incident serves as a grim reminder that smuggling continues with the tacit understanding that the BSF must be ‘satisfied’ for such activities to proceed.

These discrepancies illustrate how the issue of illegal immigration is often exaggerated for political purposes, creating a narrative that fuels public anxieties while distracting from the underlying complexities of border management and enforcement.

Ìý

Weaponising the migration narrative

THE narrative of ‘illegal Bangladeshis’ is not merely a security concern but has evolved into a potent political tool. It is regularly invoked to justify strict border policies, communal polarisation, and even economic stagnation. Claims that migrants ‘take away jobs’ or ‘burden public resources’ have been amplified without substantial evidence. For example, in 2020, then minister of state for home affairs G Kishan Reddy remarked, ‘Half of Bangladesh will be empty if India starts granting them citizenship.’ Such hyperbolic statements resonate in public discourse but remain disconnected from verifiable data.

Ìý

An unspoken tragedy

THE India-Bangladesh border has long been a site of systemic human rights violations, with the Indian Border Security Force’s persistent killings, abductions, and torture since Bangladesh’s independence in 1971. It highlights a failure to uphold human dignity alongside security. From 1972 to 2023, 5,288 killings have been recorded along the border, with the peak occurring between 2002 and 2011, accounting for 44.4 per cent of all deaths and an average of 234.9 killings per year. While there has been a reported decline in recent years — 95 killings in 2022–2023 with an annual average of 47.5 — the scale of this violence is neither normal nor justifiable. These figures are not the hallmarks of border security; they reveal a pattern of state-sanctioned human rights abuses that have disproportionately impacted Bangladeshi citizens.

One case that epitomises this inhumanity is the tragic killing of Felani Khatun, a 15-year-old girl who was shot dead on January 7, 2011 while crossing back into Bangladesh through Phulbari Upazila, Kurigram. Felani, caught in the barbed wire, hung there for five hours, bleeding to death, as BSF personnel stood idly by. The horrifying image of her lifeless body dangling from the fence shook the world’s conscience, sparking outrage and demands for justice. In response, the National Human Rights Commission of India recommended a mere Rs 500,000 compensation for her family in 2015. But such monetary compensation is grossly inadequate and morally hollow — how can a price ever be placed on the life of an innocent child whose only crime was crossing an arbitrary line drawn in history?

The BSF often justifies these killings by alleging that victims are engaged in illegal activities such as cattle smuggling. However, the credibility of this defence collapsed when India’s own Enforcement Directorate, during a case in West Bengal, revealed that BSF officials were directly involved in organised cattle smuggling into Bangladesh. This damning revelation exposes a brutal irony: the same security forces that claim to combat illegal activities are complicit in perpetuating them. It raises critical questions about the legitimacy of border operations, systemic corruption, and the impunity that allows such acts to continue unchecked.

For the thousands of Bangladeshi citizens living near the border, this violence has become an inescapable part of daily life. Families endure not only the loss of loved ones but also constant fear, economic instability, and a breakdown of trust in cross-border governance.The indiscriminate use of lethal force, arbitrary detentions, and torture by the BSF violates both India’s constitutional principles and its obligations under international human rights frameworks, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Ìý

Conflict resolution and addressing border killings

INDIA, as the world’s largest democracy and a key regional power, must hold itself to a higher standard. A secure border cannot and must not come at the cost of innocent lives. The repeated pledges by Indian authorities to limit the use of lethal weapons have largely remained empty promises. True reform requires systemic changes.Ìý

A number of actions are essential to addressing the persistent human rights abuses along the India-Bangladesh border. First, international human rights organisations such as the United Nations should keep a careful eye on the Border Security Force’s operations, investigate any infractions, and hold those responsible for them accountable. In order to monitor such violations, such as arbitrary murders and torture, a specialised human rights watchdog ought to be set up in the border regions. The government of Bangladesh must denounce transgressions, insist on open investigations, and pursue victim reparations. Furthermore, both nations ought to cooperate in enacting laws and providing financial assistance to enhance the security and welfare of border communities.

Another top focus is combating corruption and smuggling at the border. While local law enforcement and elected officials must locate and dismantle smuggling networks, the Border Guard Bangladesh should improve coordination with the BSF to stop illicit operations. The BSF should prioritise peaceful conflict resolution by implementing international standards for the use of force. To look into human rights abuses, an impartial, independent commission must be set up, and citizens of both countries must be able to file complaints and provide evidence. This body shall function openly and guarantee justice for anyone injured by violations connected to the border.

The border should be a bridge, not a battleground. How many more lives must be lost before we realise that humanity must always come before security?

Ìý

Md Obaidullah is a visiting scholar in the department of development studies at Daffodil International University, Dhaka. His research focuses on International Relations, Migration, Foreign Policy, and Asian Politics. Md Sohrab Hossen is a senior officer in the inquiry, safeguarding, and grievance management committee at BRAC. His research interests include social vulnerabilities and politics, human rights, governance, and geopolitics.