This paper deals with issues pertaining to the implementation of Comprehensive Integrated Border Management System (CIBMS), which was formulated in July 2016 after the attack on the Pathankot Air Force Station in January. It is believed that the attackers came from Pakistan to Punjab by crossing the international border, and this has made the government re-evaluate the existing mechanism of border security. The imperative has become more urgent for an overhaul of the surveillance system along the border, especially in the context of electronic surveillance. The stringency of surveillance also needs to be increased. However, before implementing the project, there are various issues facing border-management practitioners that need to be addressed. The issues need comprehensive analysis on both policy and implementation level, and the project needs to be implemented in a way that can deal with the challenge of not only infiltration but also future issues such as migration, community protection and area development.
Introduction
“To be called a sovereign nation, a nation has to be able to control its own borders. It is controlling your own destiny in a way, and we don’t control our own borders.”—Tom Tancredo
This paper is divided into two sections. The first section gives an overview of India’s western border and the events that necessitated the formulation and adoption of CIBMS. The second section deals with the challenges faced by the executioners of the project. The paper looks into concerns regarding implementation that are expected to emerge in the future. It discusses the various problems and challenges in this project from the perspective of the enforcer, i.e., the Border Security Force (BSF), and the changes that are required to be made structurally and institutionally, in addition to other factors such as border population, crime scenario and availability of land. The study focuses on the Punjab border for discussion and analysis.
Indian borders, like most manmade borders, are political boundaries. The borders dividing India from Bangladesh and Pakistan were marked based on revenue maps and ethnic differences. Such demarcation has created a unique set of problems. India has 14,818 km of land borders and a coastline of 7,516.6 km. All states, except Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Delhi and Haryana, have an international border or a coastline. A big number of India’s districts—92 out of 640, according to the 2011 census—are border districts in 17 states. Indian borders run through plains, hills, mountains, deserts, riverine territories and marshes. Managing such an expansive border is a complex task, but it is vital from the point of view of national security. The problems related to border security include unsettled maritime boundaries, lack of fully demarcated land borders, and borders based on artificial boundaries rather than natural ones.
Border-guarding forces are often short on resources and ill-equipped for modern border management and mastery. Intelligence gathering is imperfect, as are intelligence sharing and intelligence coordination—this situation needs to be changed, especially as, for example, the Indo–Pak border has been categorised as one of the most dangerous in the world. Ever since its bloody creation in 1947, which saw the displacement and killing of millions, the border area between India and Pakistan has been marked by violence. A ceasefire line, known as the Line of Control, remains in effect, with three areas of Kashmir under Indian administration and two under Pakistan. Neither side has ever formally recognised the accession of the areas claimed by the other.[i]This tension has led to three wars, and Pakistan’s support to Punjabi, and later Kashmiri, separatists has made this border prone to infiltration by militants and smugglers, posing grave challenge and risk to forces that guard it.
Despite these challenges, however, it would appear that some progress has been made. Between 2004 and 2007, diplomatic talks established the framework for a settlement over Kashmir, under which Pakistan would in effect give up its claim to Indian Kashmir, and India would agree to a ‘soft’ border (one allowing a lot of freedom of movement).[ii]This raises the important question of whether the government is paying enough attention to the security of this particularly sensitive border.
No comments:
Post a Comment