Bangladesh: Time to Think of Options
By Sankar Ghosh, The Prime Minister has ruled out the possibility of an early political settlement of the Bangladesh issue, though she has not yet despaired of a settlement on that line ultimately. She is pinning her hope on international pressure, which she thinks, is mounting, and the disinclination of the military regime in Pakistan to write off the wing permanently.
What makes the Prime Minister think that international pressure on Pakistan is mounting for a political settlement of the issue is not clear. The emissaries she has sent to world capitals have not yet achieved anything to write home about-at least newspaper reports do not indicate any such development.
The only operative part of the Indo-Soviet statement of June 8 laid down that the two sides would remain in touch with each other in order to review the situation. There is no promise of action whatsoever. Mutual consultation is part of normal routine diplomacy, and the Indian External Affairs Ministry has always been prodigiously prolific in sending out notes and aide-memoire to keep the world informed of the country’s stand on various issues.
A semantic subtlety in the joint statement requires hard scrutiny. According to the statement, the two sides considered it “imperative” for immediate measures to be taken in East Pakistan which would ensure the stoppage of influx of refugees from East Pakistan. Simultaneously the two sides thought it was “desirable” to take further steps to ensure that peace was restored and all conditions of security were created for the return of refugees to their homes in East Pakistan.
The intention in juxtaposing the two sentences is clear. The Soviet Union puts greater emphasis on stoppage of further influx than on measures to enable the evacuees to go back. The former is imperative, the latter is merely desirable. Besides, the phrase “further steps” is meaningless unless it is conceded that some steps have already been taken for restoration of peace in East Pakistan. The military regime in Pakistan may well interpret this as a go-ahead signal for its pogrom in Bangladesh.
It is al so clear from the joint statement that the Soviet Union could not accept all that Mr. Swaran Singh had to say about the social, economic and political problems as also the tensions created by the development of events in Bangladesh. The fact that the statement makes it quite clear that these matters were “explained” by Mr. Swarn Singh and that it does not contain the Soviet reaction is a pointer that the Soviet leaders did not agree with him.
The Prime Minister’s other emissaries have fared no better. They also have drawn a blank on the political level, though there is no dearth of sympathy for the hapless evacuees. But even in this sphere international action is lagging far behind actual requirements. Only a few crumbs have been thrown by the richer nations from their overfull plates, though for that also one has to be grateful.
How long international aid on its present inadequate scale will continue is a question. Voluntary aid, unbacked by political motives, has a tendency to dry up quickly. Even if it does not, its inadequacy will be for their pronounced as more evacuess pour in.
In any event, millions of evacuees cannot live for ever on small mercies of other countries. Nor can India shelter and feed them for an indefinite period. It is already at the end of its short tether. It has been estimated that India is currently spending Rs. 31 crores a month on about 3.5 million evacuees residing in camps; at this rate the yield from additional tax measures in this year’s budget will be eaten up in seven months.
As the influex continues unabated, a much bigger amount will be necessary to provide the evacuees with bare essentials; and it is quite on the cards that further tax efforts will be unavoidable during the current year, even though the Government decides to place a moratorium on development programme for the time being.
These estimates are based on the assumption that the evacuees will eventually go back to Bangladesh. If they do not, the burden on India will multiply many times. Sooner or later, a stage will be reached when the Government will have to think of their rehabilitation. The Government is not thinking of this question at the moment, and it has declared that the evacuees are here as temporary guests. The reason perhaps is that any talk of rehabilitation of the evacuees at this stage will imply that the cause for their repatriation is closed. May be the Government does not also want to think of the staggering effect of such a massive rehabilitation programme on the country’s economy as long as it can.
The enormity of the task of rehabilitation is born out by a recent report which says that about 90.000 displaced people who had come away from East Bengal earlier are still at Mana camp in Madhya Pradesh. Most of them have spent two to three years in the camp and re awaiting permanent settlement in the country. Besides, about 13,000 people are still in various transit camps in Madhya Pradesh pending rehabilitation.
The report says that Madhya Pradesh has so far absorbed about 64,000 displaced people, including settled in Dandakaranya, and the Centre has borne the entire cost of their rehabilitation amounting to Rs. 54 crores. What the expenditure on rehabilitation of millions of evacuees will be and how long it will take can be guessed from these figures.
In the circumstances, the best that can happen to India is that an early political settlement over Bangladesh is reached so that the evacuees may retum home before Indian economy. wilts under the impact of the influx. Not that all evacuees will go back. Maybe, all of them are now yearning for their lost homeland, but as time passes the yearning will loss its edge and some of them will settle for permanent stay in India, especially the poorer section of the Hindu evacuees. But India’s burden will be received to the extent there is a trek back.
Ever since the bust-up in Bangladesh, India’s efforts have been directed to this end. It is possible that India took to this course after careful consideration of all its options. That is why India has chosen not to recognise the provisional Government of Bangladesh for the time being at least; nor has it spelt out the type of political settlement which it thinks will enable the evacuees in return home with a feeling of security and without any fear of reprisal.
There will be a point in India persisting in this course if there is evidence that events are shaping to India’s desire. Of this there is none yet, though it may still be premature to give in to despair. that the Government also is assailed by doubts about the success of its policy is indicated by the Prime Minister’s hint that a decision regarding recognition of the provisional Government of Bangladesh may be taken after the return of Mr. Swaran Singh from his mission abroad.
Out of the complex situation created by the turmoil in Bangladesh one fact that sticks out is that India can undertake rehabilitation of the millions of evacuees from Bangladesh only at its economic and political peril. To accept the burden is to play Pakistan’s game.
If other countries, especially the Big Powers, do not come to the aid of India to throw off this burden, it should be open to India to resort to any means to divest itself of this responsibility. The means has to be the quickest, the surest and the most economical. Though it may sound hawkish. India cannot forceclose its options in the pursuit of the receding chances of a political settlement. To leave out alternatives may be catastrophic for the country.
Reference: Hindustan Standard 6.6.1971