‘Communal’, ‘communal’Surveying the theatres that are being used to trans-ship arms, to orchestrate propaganda against India, that are being used as staging points for agents, the Task Force on Border Management remarked,‘‘The Task Force has noted with concern the rapid spread of madrasas and mosques in border areas on almost all borders. Most of these constructions have come up without any formal approval of the competent local authorities.’’ Pause right there for a moment, and imagine the hue and cry that will be raised against the local Collector should he move to demolish these ‘‘religious structures’’ on the ground that they have come up ‘‘without any formal approval of the competent local authorities.’’ But to continue with what the Task Force sets out: ‘‘In several cases, considerable foreign funds have become available to these institutions through non-banking institutions. Efforts at Arabisation of Muslims and their education is a matter of concern which should not be dismissed light-heartedly. Bringing the educational curriculum of madrasas into the mainstream by the inclusion of subjects such as physics, chemistry, mathematics, information technology and so on is a major challenge which must be accepted in the long term interest of the country.’’ The Task Force elaborated the danger swelling in these institutions later in its Report. ‘‘In maktabs and madrasas, young students are taught Urdu, Arabic and even Persian languages and imparted instruction in the teachings of Islam,’’ it began. ‘‘Focus is on traditional religious teaching, and modern subjects like science, mathematics, social studies and modern languages are not taught. The students coming out of the madrasas are, therefore, not able to join mainstream education. At best, they gravitate from a maktab where primary-level education is taught to a madrasa where secondary-level traditional education is imparted. History if it is taught in a madrasa would be Islamic history and not modern history or world history. Madrasa students acquire good proficiency in Urdu and Arabic languages, but without other knowledge they find themselves quite ill-equipped to transact business in present day society.’’ A good grounding for both — separatism and bitterness. ‘‘Madrasa education is exclusivist in nature,’’ the Task Force emphasised, ‘‘with total emphasis on the study of Islamic education in utter disregard of other systems of education. This (instruction) relies on the worldview of managers or maulvis running these institutions that nothing valuable, worth assimilation, exists outside Islamic studies and beyond Urdu and Arabic languages. Due to this reason, syllabi of madrasas remain static while knowledge outside advances and multiplies exponentially.’’ The Task Force recalled the various schemes that had been initiated since 1980 to modernise madrasas, and how they had evoked little response even from state governments, to say nothing of the maulvis. Yet madrasas and mosques have mushroomed, and this has ominous implications for national security, the Task Force stressed: ‘‘There has been mushrooming and visible growth of mosques and madrasas all along our international borders. The intriguing thing is that these have come up where there is very small or no population of the minority community and that madrasas and mosques have sprung up on both sides of the border as if in unison. These institutions could be construed as Islamic infrastructure and have a potential for intelligence encirclement of India. Concerted efforts are being made for Arabisation of Indian Muslim tradition by promoting Arabic or Salafi brand of Islam among Muslims living in border areas.’’ The Task Force proceeded to provide specific figures of madrasas and mosques that had suddenly sprung up along our borders with Bangladesh, Nepal and Pakistan. It reported, ‘‘On the Indo-Bangladesh border, growth of madrasas and mosques is taking place along with a shift in demographic composition due to illegal immigration of large number of people from Bangladesh into the border districts in India. Increasing crowding out of economic opportunities for the local population and the shift towards Islamisation create potential for future strife. This is likely to put pressure on the strategic Siliguri corridor.’’ Turning to the Indo-Nepal border, the Task Force found developments that were equally ominous: ‘‘On the Indo-Nepal border, madrasas and mosques have sprung up on both sides in the Terai region, accompanied by four-fold increase in the population of the minority community in the region. There are 343 mosques, 300 madrasas and 17 mosques-cum-madrasas within 10 kms of the border in the Indian side. On the Nepal side, there are 282 mosques, 181 madrasas and eight mosques-cum-madrasas. These mosques and madrasas receive huge funds from Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Managers of various madrasas and ulema maintain close links with the embassy officials of those countries located at Kathmandu. Financial assistance is also channelised through the Islamic Development Bank (Jeddah), Habib Bank of Pakistan and also through some Indian Muslims living in Gulf countries. Pakistan’s Habib Bank, after becoming a partner in Nepal’s Himalayan Bank, has expanded its network in the border areas including Biratnagar and Krishna Nagar. It is suspected that foreign currency is converted into Indian currency in Nepal and then brought to India clandestinely.’’ A little aside is in order here. Readers know how vulnerable the Siliguri corridor is. Known as the ‘‘chicken’s neck’’, barely 30 miles wide, it is our only land link to the Northeast. The district in Nepal that adjoins this slender corridor is Jhapa. There is no great concentration of Muslims in that district. Yet, in just three years, 33 new madrasas sprung up. But to continue with what the Task Force had to say in this regard: ‘‘Madrasas and mosques on the Indo-Nepal border are frequently visited by prominent Muslim leaders, Tabligh Jamaats and pro-Pak Nepali leaders. Officials of Pak Embassy have come to notice visiting Terai area of Nepal to strengthen Islamic institutions and to disburse funds to them. Pro-Pak elements in Nepal also help in demographic subversion of the Terai belt.’’ Along the Rajasthan border? ‘‘In the Rajasthan sector of the India-Pakistan border, there are 129 madrasas, registered with the Wakf Board. There are a large number of unregistered madrasas in the border belt. The growth of madrasas in this belt has been higher than in other places in the state. Madrasa Islamia (Pokharan), Madrasa Anwarul Uloom (Jaisalmer) and Madrasa Ahle Sunnat Rizvia (Jaisalmer) have become centres of fundamentalist activities in this area. Tabligh Jamaats from Maharashtra and Gujarat have been creating pockets of their influence in Barmer district where 14 Deen-e-Talim madrasas have recently come up.’’ Further to the Southwest, ‘‘In the Gujarat sector of the border, there are 34 madrasas in Kachchccha district (1995) and 28 in Banaskantha district where their number increased by 55 per cent during 1991-1995. They receive large sums of money from locals as well as from outside.’’ ‘‘Both in Gujarat and Rajasthan, there has been mounting pressure on local cultural tradition of minority community from the Pak-Islamic identity thrust,’’ the Task Force noted — something that should surprise no one: for the very essence of the Tabligh movement has been to compel converts to shed all syncretistic practices and beliefs. ‘‘These areas are also experiencing high growth rate of minority population.’’ The Task Force then turned to the India-Bangladesh border. It warned that right across this region ‘‘demographic invasion is taking place from across the border.’’ Observing that in the border districts the magnitude of this invasion is ‘‘much more startling’’, that it is even ‘‘more menacing’’, the Task Force noted that the ‘‘Indo-Bangladesh border has seen the most rapid growth of madrasas and mosques.’’ Furnishing state-wise figures, the Task Force recorded that on the Indian side, in close proximity to the border, there are now 905 mosques and 439 madrasas. And that on the Bangladesh side, there are 960 mosques and 469 madrasas. The figures that the Task Force set out, and even more so the deliberate planning that had gone into stringing these institutions along the border should shake us out of our stupor. What the Task Force said about ‘‘some worrisome developments relating to madrasas,’’ should alarm us: It listed these as follows: ‘‘(a) Talibanisation of madrasas is taking place due to spread of fundamentalist ideology in these institutions. In J&K, growth of madrasas, fundamentalist teaching and consequent Talibanisation preceded growth of insurgency. ‘‘(b) Imparting of religious instruction in Arabic in place of Urdu is alienating Muslim children from their Indian Muslim moorings and pushing them towards Arabisation. This is happening even in more liberal Muslim society such as in Kerala. ‘‘(c) Madrasas in some places are reported to be sheltering ISI agents and subversive elements. ‘‘(d) With the increasing enrollment of children in madrasas, maulvis are acquiring greater centrality in community life, increasing their vote-delivering capacity and political clout. ‘‘(e) Indoctrination of young children and planting of fundamentalist strains in their minds in madrasas would pose serious problems to our polity in future. ‘‘(f) Presence of madrasas and mosques along the borders on both sides could facilitate trans-border movement of arms and agent provocateurs aided and abetted by ISI. ‘‘(g) Economic backwardness of the local Muslim community easily falsifies the claim of construction of these madrasas and mosques with local support and gives credence to the apprehensions of outside support for their construction.’’ ‘Demographic invasion’ The IB has documented, Governors like General S K Sinha and T V Rajeshwar have warned that Bangladeshis are usurping extended tracts of India. The Census figures show that the apprehensions have grossly underestimated the magnitude of the invasion. Apart from the direct economic consequences of such occupation, it changes — it has already changed, and dramatically so — the demographic composition of the region. Moreover, the fact that hundreds of thousands are able to creep in and settle down, makes it that much easier for Pakistani agencies to send across some of their own personnel and agents as ‘‘normal infiltrators’’. As committees upon committees had done before it, the Task Force on Border Management drew attention to the danger this inundation from Bangladesh spells — of the subversion that will come through ‘‘democracy’’ itself. So serious did it find the problem that it devoted a separate chapter to it. Drawing on intelligence reports, and studies based on them, the Task Force reported: ‘‘Studies have indicated that in 18 per cent of the Assembly constituencies in West Bengal and 32 per cent Assembly constituencies in Assam, Bangladesh migrants can influence the poll outcome one way or the other. A study showed that about 96 per cent Bangladesh immigrant respondents took active part in electoral politics in Kishanganj district in Bihar. They have thus been able to impact on law-making and running of administration including police through their legislators. They are already looming large in the fragile polity of West Bengal, Assam and Tripura. One can easily see the emerging contours of future subversion of the North-East.’’ The Task Force urged a series of steps, steps that have been urged so many times: compulsory registration of citizens and non-citizens living in India; all citizens should be given a multi-purpose National Identity Card; non-citizens should be given identity cards of a different colour and design; a ‘‘Work Permit’’ should be introduced for foreigners; the IMDT Act should be repealed and action against illegal foreigners should be taken uniformly under the Foreigners’ Act; Residence records of villages in the border districts should be prepared and regularly updated; primary data collected during the Census should be used to detect illegal foreigners; financial rewards for information about illegal foreigners should be instituted; border fencing, Joint Working Group with Bangladesh. The problem is not that we cannot think up what needs to be done. The problem is different: as the Task Force put it, ‘‘There is an all-round failure in India to come to grips with the problem of illegal immigration. Facts are well known, opinions are firmed up, and the operating system is in place. But the tragedy is that despite this, nothing substantial happens due to the catharsis of arriving at a decision in this regard due to sharp division of interest among the political class.’’ The result is well illustrated by the fate of an elementary proposal that has been urged by scores of committees and the like. The Task Force noted with dismay: ‘‘Attention may be invited to yet another disconcerting aspect of our national life. It is amazing to see that though over five decades have elapsed since Independence, we have not been able to implement a National Identity Card scheme nor the scheme for a National Citizenship Register. Crores of rupees have been wasted on issue of election cards in a few states. The Income Tax Department is now issuing its own PAN cards to income tax assessees. All such expenditure could have been avoided by issue of all-purpose identity card to all citizens of the country. In the absence of such a card, irrespective of the legal niceties, passport, election card and ration card are treated as evidence of citizenship. And all these are easy to get by providing an illegal gratification of just a few hundred rupees to the concerned functionaries in government departments. How much more can the citizenship of a country be devalued?’’ The Task Force pointed to ‘‘the withdrawal of large contingent of forces from the borders,’’ their diversion to sundry tasks, with the consequence that ‘‘the distance between the Border Outposts (which, in the estimate of the Task Force, must not exceed three or four kms) has increased to as much as 10 to 40 kms.’’ ‘‘This has made the borders porous,’’ it warned, so much so that ‘‘With such deployment, it is futile to have any force at the borders at all.’’ Such porosity has made it that much easier for the infiltrators to flood the country, it said: ‘‘This (the resulting inundation) has changed the demographic composition of several areas not only along the borders but also in places like Delhi. Unfortunately, the discussion on this subject invariably assumes (the wrong expression, if I may say so: the words should be ‘.is invariably given’) communal overtones, with political parties taking positions to suit the interests of their vote-banks. As a result, even the urgent task of repeal of the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act (IMDT) which is patently discriminatory and applicable only to Assam has remained to be accomplished.’’ Recall the words: ‘‘the discussion on this subject invariably assumes communal overtones.’’ Exactly that happened the other day in the Rajya Sabha. I had been asked to initiate the debate on internal security, and was reading from this report. The Congress spokesman denounced me for giving the discussion ‘‘a communal colour’’! Are the IB, R&AW, the current Governor of J&K, General S K Sinha, the current Governor of UP, T V Rajeshwar, the members of these Task Forces — are all of them ‘‘communal’’? Yet the canard to once again dodge the facts. As for scrapping the ruinous IMDT Act, the new Government has declared that the Act will continue. But we are second to none in our determination to safeguard our borders, and the security and integrity of our country, its spokesmen shout. The writer is a BJP MP and former Union minister. PART I PART II PART IV
