What is the similarity between opposition to the U.S. Mexico Wall and Bangladeshi Infiltration into India

  • By Dr Amarjit Singh
  • January 14 2019
  • 1765 views
  • Most Indians oppose infiltration from Bangladesh. However, like some Indian politicians U.S. Presidents have for vote bank politics, supported illegal immigration through Mexico. Author tells about the impact of illegal immigration on national security. Intent of such immigration is illegal trade, change demographics and eventually assume political power.

India built walls along the Bangladesh and Pakistan borders, a project that is still ongoing.  The aims of these walls (or fences) are to deter terrorists, smugglers, human traffickers, and illegal immigrants.  India takes the border fence projects very seriously, including after the recent Uri attack.  Virtually every Indian supports the construction of these fences, and supports the reduction of all illegal activity across the borders.  And, India being a relatively weak country owing to its poverty and numerous factional politicians can ill afford to let foreigners enter its country through the back door to upstage the political forces, or consume public services meant for legal citizens paid by legal citizens and legal tax rupees.

 

Yet, in the United States, the public and many of its politicians would allow exactly that to happen by allowing illegal immigration across the Mexican-US border.  But, before President Obama passed an executive order (decree) to grant amnesty to all illegal aliens (nearly 11 to 16 million of them), Indian President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed granted amnesty to 30 million Bangladeshi immigrants to enter India in the aftermath of the Bangladesh war.  Ahmed was motivated to sanction the amnesty for four reasons:

  • As a gift to Bangladesh to ease the economic burden on that fledging country 
  • To help his fellow Muslim brethren 
  • To increase the Congress party voter pool in India, because Muslims traditionally vote Congress
  • Change the demographics of a turbulent Northeast, already hit by separatist movements in Nagaland, Mizoram, Tripura, Meghalaya, and Assam, thereby hoping to dampen the effect of the separatist movements.

At that time, Indian security officers spoke out in volumes against that amnesty, warning of consequences in the fragile Northeast.  Those voluble voices continued into the 1980s when the actual upheaval caused by the Bangladeshi immigrants became visible. Conscientious security officers, such as one I met many years later in 2009 whose report on the matter was submitted to the Indian President, were flabbergasted to see the havoc caused in increased militant activities, economic disruption, increased smuggling of everything from people to weapons, and a total change in the demographics of the Northeast regions that increased friction rather than dampen secessionist movements.  The voices of discontent and disbelief among security officers continue unabated to the present,[1] though an expanded and improved fence is helping mitigate the adverse pressures.

 

Discredit to India

 

However, a nation is doing a disservice to itself by giving a gift to another nation when that gift is a detriment to itself.  One can understand parochial reasons for assisting others, but when national interests are at stake, this gift comes back to hurt the gifter.  Too bad, there is no law to prevent Presidents from issuing such outlandish and disgraceful decrees. 

 

Bullet point 1, above, helped Bangladesh, no doubt, with the immigrants repatriating money to Bangladesh to assist in the economy of Bangladesh, reducing the burden of 30 million expatriates on the food, water, electricity, schooling, and health burden of Bangladesh.  But, bullets 3 and 4 were unsuccessful in the long run, since even an expanded voter base was unable to grant Congress substantial victories in the Northeast.  To the utter discredit of India, arms and ammunition came across the India-Bangladesh border for nefarious purposes [2].

 

The obvious question pops up, as to how can any self-respecting country allow such arms smuggling? In India’s context, we can recall hundreds of fifth columnists, knowing how debased human behavior is – but in America’s context, given its economic richness and respect for law, it is more discomfiting if this happens there. 

 

Illegal Immigration is a Crime

 

Every nation has an inalienable right to construct walls and fences to protect its sovereignty, borders, and catch criminals.  Included among criminals in all countries of the world are illegal entrants.  In the USA, illegal immigration is a certified misdemeanor, which is classified as a crime.  If the immigrant returns illegally after being deported, it is classified as a felony, which is one step worse than a misdemeanor. [3]

 

Yet, it is astonishing that there are politicians in America who would make the illegal legal.  Indeed, by granting a sweeping amnesty to the 11 to 16 million illegal immigrants in USA, President Obama decriminalized them.  But, he went further: he ordered the Border Patrol Force to stand down and release all illegal immigrants, most of who have jumped the fence along the US-Mexican border [4]. This is even a step beyond Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, whose amnesty was after a moment of national victory.  By this step, Obama has signaled and allowed all foreign nationals to enter the country illegally, and claim immediate release.  This obviously sounds nothing less than turning the country over to ones enemies. 

 

Would Indians tolerate Pakistanis coming into India unrestricted?  But now, any terrorist, any individual, or any criminal from any other country is granted free ride to enter the USA, even if caught doing so.

 

The more I read into this, the more shocking it becomes.  A President exists in a country who is willing to sacrifice his country and forego its moral interests.  This is not only selfish, it is treacherous, unpatriotic, [5] and doesn’t sound anything less than a fifth columnist.

 

The Real Threat to America

 

The fence is related to USA’s security like no other.  To wit, on 10/11/2001, exactly one month after jihadi airplanes plunged into the twin towers, it is reported that Mike Tenet, CIA Director, informed President George Bush that two suitcase nukes had been smuggled into USA.  This information had Bush going “through the roof,” [6] as any normal and rational President would.  The greater details of how Al-Qaeda paid hundreds of millions of dollars for these nukes from former stockpiles of unaccounted for Russian suitcase nukes is given in greater detail in other accounts. [7]

 

The fact of the revelationary investigation on this issue irrevocably shows that these nukes walked in across the porous US-Mexican border, which President Obama has made irrelevant to US security, when it is the most frightening aspect of anything that can happen to any country.  George Bush tried to secure the border, but the massive opposition he received to do so can be easily recalled. [8] It is nothing short of unbelievable how tremendous the pressure is on US Presidents to allow illegal immigrants into the country.  But, how do these nukes come in via that contentious border? An insight into the full trade may help all appreciate the problem better.

 

Afghani Hashish

 

The long walk of the nukes begins with Afghani hashish. Sold and traded in the Pathani financial capital of Quetta, the hashish is transported to Karachi by local agents in Pakistan. The Turkish Bubas, a large crime gang of Turkey, picks up the hashish from the ports of Karachi and brings them into the European part of Turkey across the Bosphorus.  From there, they sell the hashish to the Albanian Mafia who are the pre-eminent smugglers of hashish throughout Europe and Latin America. The Albanian Mafia is believed to be most ruthless in its operations, swiftly eliminating all opposition in the old-fashioned way. Reportedly, they gained a firm foothold in Latin America by using guns and rifles given to them from the same stock of people who sent them the hashish in the first place, the Pathans, who manufacture small arms of multiple varieties, including AK-47s, in the copycat production facilities located in the teeming and bustling city of Peshawar [9].

 

By boldly making opposition vanish in Latin America, the Albanian Mafia secured the illegal drug business in the largest and most lucrative market in the world – the USA.  Because coming into the USA by themselves would be a substantive security risk for the Albanian Mafia, they wisely decided from a business perspective to palm off the trade to the Mara Salvatrucha, a vicious crime gang of Mexico that focuses on business in Central America and USA.  Besides, picking up a fight for pre-eminence with the Mara Salvatrucha would be equivalent to them of taking on an equal rival of equal power or greater.  Hence, the Albanian Mafia decided to join forces, instead, with Mara Salvatrucha.  Members of the heartless gang of Mara Salvatrucha are reputed to earn their stripes by proving they murdered someone – any one – for any reason or non-reason.

 

With this type of a power smuggling hashish across the US-Mexican border, it is easier to understand why the recent Mexican drug war was so bloody and lasted so long, though it is a long way from being finished [10]With being able to smuggle drugs into USA in impunity, the Mara Salvatrucha is a force to contend with.

 

Nukes by the Same Route

 

The nukes entering the United States take the same route, as does hashish. Once inside the USA, the nukes quickly disappear into sleeper cells.  Because the nukes belong to the Moslems who bought them from the Chechens, they nukes are transferred to sleeper mosques in USA [11].  This is why safeguarding the US-Mexican border is a matter of life and death for the United States.

 

But once, George Bush got wind of the possibility of nukes being in USA, he set various policies into motion, the most infamous being the Patriot Act that allowed spy agencies to listen in on any US resident and citizen.  Though US citizens felt outraged at the confiscation of their liberties, what would you have done if you had been US President, and had to decide for the security of your citizens?  Hard times entail hard choices, and securing the safety by the fastest and easiest route is the most preferred in hard times.

 

The entire issue of nukes crossing into USA across the US-Mexican border is not simply a matter of two nukes only.  Al-Qaeda operatives promised the “American Hiroshima” where at least 2 to 4 million Americans would be killed, 50% of who should be children. Not only that, they are reported to be planning a simultaneous explosion in major US cities – Boston, New York, Miami, Chicago, Washington, Las Vegas, and Los Angeles. [12]

 

With such serious issues at stake, it is a no-brainer that the US-Mexican border should be sealed.

 

Why Obama Won’t Seal the Border

 

The reasons for why President Obama will not seal the border is likely similar to the reasoning adopted by Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed. 

 

One, Obama is beholden to the Latinos, 75% of who voted for him in 2012, just as the vast majority of Muslims voted for Congress in the 1967 and 1971 general elections.  Just as Ahmed thought the Bangladeshi immigrants would vote for the Congress once they become Indian citizens, or once their children grow up or are born in India will vote for Congress, Obama likely thinks that the Hispanics he allows to enter USA from across the US-Mexican border will vote for his Democratic party.  In doing so, he is not making a unilateral decision, though, because it is more probable that the leaders of the Democratic Party have asked him to do so.  Hence, Hillary Clinton supports Obama’s amnesty law in order to get the Hispanic vote for her election, even though it should be remembered that Bill Clinton himself brought up the illegal immigrant issue during his own campaign of 1992, and later increased border patrolling to arrest illegal immigrants trying to cross over when he became President.

 

This is also contrary to the very fact that as recently as 2008, during her election campaign against Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton herself called for an end to the rampant border crossings from Mexico [13]It is also known that Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants [14],[15].  At that time, it didn't sound so bad, because many thought it was an okay method to get cheap labor in USA. This just proves that politics is a matter of convenience and expediency, justifying the unjustifiable, and sacrificing policy positions and all semblance of sanity any time the politician does not find his/her bread buttered the right way.

 

Brown-skin Votes

 

Brown-skinned people, such as the Hispanics are considered to traditionally vote for the Democratic Party because they liken the Republican Party to white-skinned racists who once kept black slaves, though it was really the Democrats prior to the abolishment of slavery who owned most slaves.

 

Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery in part because he was Republican and wanted to snip the powers and influence of the Democrats of the time.  Though, Lincoln is hailed as a hero, his motives were anything but.  Hence, the Hispanics associate themselves with modern-day Democrats who are liberal and tolerant of brown-skin.

It is for the same reason that Indian-Americans largely support Democrats, forgetting that as recently as 20 years ago, Bill Clinton, then the US Democratic President, referred to India as the “most unimportant place in the world,” while Al Gore referred to India as a “strategic competitor” when George Bush [16], was referring to India as a “natural partner” during the 2000 elections.

 

How the Americans Fool Themselves

 

Though the Hispanics may vote Democratic in the short run, what all Americans, including white Democrats forget is that their country is being taken over by Hispanics entering USA illegally. It is one thing to have free trade, or have freedom of thought and speech, or have many other freedoms and liberties in the USA, but the line must be drawn when it comes to national integrity and sovereignty, because there is nothing more important to a nation than national security.

 

The US might rue the day it passed the amnesty decree that allowed illegal immigrants to stay in the USA indefinitely.  Not only does this legally passed Presidential decree fly in the face of the laws of the present time, but also it is definitely considered unpatriotic in many quarters for natural and logical reasons, let alone the philosophical reasons of the lack of loyalty to one’s country. 

 

Who in India is really happy with the blanket, free ticket that Fakhruddin Ahmed gave to the illegal Bangladeshi Muslim immigrants? What’s worse, the Congress Party whom he represented is virtually irrelevant as a potent election force, and so the raison d'être of Ahmed’s decision, exemplified by the four bullets at the beginning of this article, have been driven into the wind. Thus, the USA fools itself to think that all will be well if they allow so many illegals to enter and vote Democratic.

 

That Presidents end up doing like this is so much the worse for a country. The consequences for the world and USA are tremendous. And, it is as if all morality was abandoned and all ethical values discarded.

 

Conclusion

 

In conclusion, allowing illegal immigrants to enter a country – any country – is against the laws of every country in the world.  But, that such illegal entry is decriminalized by a Presidential decree, without passage of vote by Congress or Parliament, is an even greater travesty. It is as if the USA had a death wish, and was planning its own demise – digging its own grave.  At this rate, why does America need foreign enemies to defeat them, because America stands to defeat and efface itself by such decisions?

 

India has not bounced completely out of the bad decision taken by President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed in regard to illegal Bangladeshi immigrants, and has, instead, found itself at the butt end of a terrible terror and secessionist movement in its Northeast. 

 

Correspondingly, it is only a matter of time before states in the USA that develop majorities of the present-day minorities – read Hispanics – will start constitutionally declaring themselves as independent countries, leading to the break-up of the United States as we know it.  That will be a sad day for USA, but probably a happy day for all of America’s enemies and those who hate it.

Also read

1 Citizenship Amendment Bill: A humanitarian act by Nitin Gokhale

2 India only home of the followers of Dharma by Sanjeev Nayyar

3 Bodo-Muslim conflict in Assam – historical roots by R Upadhay

4 Indian Minorities and Illegal migrants by M P Bezabaruah

5 App value of Cows smuggled into Bangladesh $ 500 million 2012 report  

 

END NOTES

1 Chirantan Kumar, “Migration and Refugee Issue between India and Bangladesh,” Biannual Publication of Centre for Defence Studies Research & Development, Vol. 1, No. 1,  pp. 64-82, http://www.academia.edu/1840404/MIGRATION_AND_REFUGEE_ISSUE_BETWEEN_INDIA_AND_BANGLADESH, January 2009.

2 V K Shasikumar, “The Subverted Indo-Bangladesh Border : I,” Indian Defence Review, Vol. 24 (2),http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/the-subverted-indo-bangladesh-border-i/,

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/the-subverted-indo-bangladesh-border-i/, Apr – June 2009.

3 “Illegal Immigration is a Crime,” Federation for American Immigration Reform, http://www.fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration-is-a-crime, n.d. 

4 “Obama Tells Border Agents to Stand Down,” The Daily Wire, http://www.dailywire.com/news/3186/obama-tells-border-agents-stand-down-hank-berrien#, Feb 5, 2016.

5 Sri Aurobindo, “On Nationalism,” Sri Aurobindo Ashram, Pondicherry, 1965.

6 “Al-Qaida Nukes Already in U.S.,” WND, http://www.wnd.com/2005/07/31232/, Nov 07, 2005.

7 Paul L. Williams, “The Al Qaeda Connection: International Terrorism, Organized Crime and the Coming Apocalypse,” Prometheus Books, NY, ISBN-10: 1591023491, 2005.

8 “George W. Bush on Immigration,” On the Issues, http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/George_W__Bush_Immigration.htm, n.d.

9 Paul Williams, op. cit.

10 Jeremy Kryt, “Why the Military Will Never Beat Mexico's Cartels,” The Daily Beast, http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/02/will-mexico-s-surreal-drug-war-ever-end.html, 04.01.2016.

11 Paul Williams, op. cit.

12 Al-Qaida, op. cit.

13 Mily Schwartz Greco, “Why Hillary Clinton Can’t Count on Donald Trump to Win Her the Hispanic Vote,” Moyers and Co., http://billmoyers.com/story/hillary-clinton-cant-count-donald-trump-win-hispanic-vote/, June 13, 2016.

14 Victor Dabis Hanson, “The Latino Vote Obsession,” National Review, http://www.nationalreview.com/article/333244/latino-vote-obsession-victor-davis-hanson, Nov 13, 2012.

15 It is also a fact that Reagan wanted to repay the Hispanics who voted for him in his state of California, which carries the largest Hispanic population in USA.

16 Most Indians find George Bush funny because of their own personality, even though George Bush did more for India at a strategic moment in history than probably any other US President.

First published here. eSamskriti has obtained permission from Indian Defence Review to re-publish this article.  

Receive Site Updates