Immigration's Agonizing Impact on Faith and Identity: An Examination by Shashi Warrier
In a chilly May evening, an unscheduled visit turned into an impassioned debate. Raghavan, his wife, and a mutual friend bustled into our home, glasses clinking with the aroma of rain wafting through the windowpanes. However, the tranquility was short-lived as the conversation veered into the contentious topic of immigration, particularly Bangladeshi immigrants.
The dialogue commenced casually, discussing the difficulties faced by Prita while finding a plumber. Raghavan's wife proposed bringing in immigrants to ease the workforce shortage. Yet, Raghavan stood firm against the idea, concerned about the rising crime rates attributed to these immigrants, pointing out the Rohingyas as a case in point.
Prita countered, arguing that there was no evidence of disproportionate criminal activity among these immigrants, and their national loyalties were a mystery. The conversation spiraled, with Raghavan suggesting the possibility of focusing on rogue elements facilitating illegal immigration instead of the immigrants themselves.
Murthy, joining the discussion later, offered insightful observations. He mentioned an unwritten agreement between India and Bangladesh, with Sheikh Hasina ensuring the safety of non-Muslims and India overlooking the passage of Bangladeshi immigrants. However, with the change in power, this agreement seems to have dissolved.
Murthy urged attention to the corrupt elements within Indian institutions, such as politicians, bureaucrats, and agents, who enable illegal immigration. He warned that unless these issues were addressed, the crackdown would only lead to a temporary solution, as the immigrants would simply return if conditions remained unfavorable.
He also highlighted the challenges faced by non-Muslim immigrants returning to Bangladesh, now under threat from Islamists. Responding to Mrs Raghavan's question about why non-Muslims don't come to India legally, Murthy explained the difficulties involved in uprooting and migrating, including the struggle to sell property, the uncertainty of legal clearance, and the fear of being kept in limbo like Pakistani Hindus.
When asked about the policy's religious bias, Murthy countered, "Because corruption has no religion." This statement sparked a conversation about the complexities surrounding immigration and the need for a balanced, well-informed policy rather than a hastily enacted, potentially discriminatory one.
A Closer Look: India's Immigration Policy Towards Bangladeshi Immigrants
In 2025, India implemented a comprehensive crackdown on undocumented Bangladeshi immigrants, which gained momentum after a terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir. This policy, part of a broader national security strategy, involves several key elements:
- Push Back Strategy: Undocumented immigrants are being physically returned to Bangladesh without legal proceedings, as part of "Operation Push-back."
- Nationwide Raids: Raids have been conducted across the country, leading to the detention and deportation of thousands of suspected immigrants, primarily from border states like Gujarat.
- Deportation Process: Deported immigrants are often sent to border states like Assam or Tripura before being pushed back into Bangladesh.
This policy has been met with protests from Bangladesh, calling for India to adhere to established repatriation mechanisms. However, the Indian government maintains the need for Bangladesh to accept its nationals found residing illegally in India.
- The heated discussion, initiated over home-and-garden concerns, failed to remain casual as it progressed to social media discussions, dilating into politics and general-news topics such as immigration.
- Delving deeper into the complexity, Murthy introduced the concept of a perceived unwritten agreement between India and Bangladesh, affecting the lifestyle of both nations through the movement of immigrants.
- The ongoing debate emphasized the importance of having a balanced lifestyle, reflecting responsible policies and informed actions, rather than rash decisions influenced by emotions, in the matter of immigration.
