From: was@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (wasif.sattar)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: How about an EEC type arrangement in our subcontinent? (wasRe: News)
Date: 8 Oct 92 15:11:42 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <1b0rfhINN1d3@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>, misra@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Boo!) writes:
> sahmed@occs.cs.oberlin.edu (Saif Ahmed) writes:
> 
> >The Indian government claim they are Bangladeshi citizens. Most of
> >them were originally from Bangladesh but have lived in India for over
> >30 years or so and most of them have Indian ration cards and ids. Some
> 
> 	what does living in india for 30yrs have to do with it? I could 
> 	evade the INS and live here for 30 years but if i get caught
> 	they will send me back. If some of them are not citizens of Bd
> 	then that must be rectified, but someone is a citizen then 
> 	they must return regardless of how long they have lived in india.

There is a subtle difference between your evading the INS and living
here for 30 years and a person born in what is now Bangladesh living in
what is now India. Before 1947 the present Bangladesh and the present
India were part of the British Empire and coexisted in what was then 
called India. Those of us who were born in the Indian subcontinent have
a certain claim to the whole subcontinent as our home but we cannot
lay a claim to live in the USA on similar grounds [unless of course
if we back-track through history and point out that the British colonies
of North America and the colony of India were both part of the British
Empire].

The partition of 1947 was an agreement between the British rulers and
Indian leaders neither of whom were necessarily elected representatives of
the people they represented. Many families were split up by the partition.
No heed was given to those who were not in favor of the partition of the
British India. What about these people who did not accept the partition?
Could they choose to call both countries their home? Can't they can lay
claim to both countries on a moral/ethical/ethnic/cultural/family/religious
basis? If they were originally from one of the new countries formed after
the partition did they forever forfeit the right to live in the other
country?

On a practical basis in third world countries like India, Bangladesh or
Pakistan, immigration and population shifts could create havoc with the
already fragile economic conditions that exist. Ethnic tensions often
flare up and cause immense loss of lives and property as we have seen
again and again in Karachi. In Bangladesh we have seen a steady open-ended
immigration of Indian Muslims beginning in 1947 who claim to be Pakistanis
but Pakistan does not have warm meals and clean beds waiting for them. 
Would it be a humane thing to do if we push them back into India regardless
of how long they have lived in Bangladesh?

In my judgement the solution lies not in pushing back the people to where
they originally came from but to work on a united basis to help resolve
the problems which forced them to leave their birthplaces. At the same time
we should make it easier for people within the subcontinent to move about
and live anywhere they choose within the subcontinent.

This leads me to the question - Could we have an EEC type arrangement in
our subcontinent? Would it be viable? Obviously we would have to proceed
in small steps. It was not an easy road for the EEC to bring together so
many nations, cultures, economic systems under one umbrella. We have the 
unique advantage of having been one country in the past. Do you think we
would see a subcontinent economic community within our lifetime?

Shubhechhante,
Wasif