The volatility is almost synonymous with the northeastern region of India. This is not merely internal resentment but also a threat from external and transborder elements as well. Northeast shares land and river borders with a number of countries. With the passing of time, things have become more complicated. The intention of the bordering nations, particularly Bangladesh, to annex northeast is nothing new. This was part of the larger game plan of Islamabad through East Pakistan to sabotage India’s strategic and security interests. Nothing changed after the formation of Bangladesh. However, the recent development of a possible nexus consisting of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and insurgent outfits of Nagaland shows the intensity of the threat not only against the northeast but the entire country. As per media reports, Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and Islamists in Bangladesh took an official stand to help the insurgent outfit of the Nagaland National Socialist Council of Nagaland to take forward the anti-India agenda. The media reports also stated NSCN chief Muivah was taking a tougher stand after the alleged failure of the last two rounds of talks between NSCN and New Delhi.

However, this is nothing new. The Naga insurgency has always been used as a tool by Pakistan against India since the beginning. Similarly, the Naga insurgency has been the most complicated issue for India as far as the internal security of India is concerned. On the other hand, one of the major reasons for the turmoil in the northeast is obviously the Naga insurgency, which instigated, provoked, and, at the same time, compelled other ethnic groups of northeast India to form insurgent outfits across the region. However, one needs to heed the characteristic differences between Naga insurgents and others fomented in the northeast. The dominating approach of Naga insurgents against other ethnic groups of the region has been a major cause of conflict in the region. Unlike other insurgent outfits, the religious identity of Nagaland makes it different. The same thing happened in Mizoram and Meghalaya. The Christianity across the northeast propagated by the Naga made the entire belt a favourite hunting ground for the Western powers long back. Naturally, as the prominent insurgent outfit, Naga insurgents always get moral and diplomatic support from western powers. With the change of power equations and the emergence of China as a military power, Beijing has extended its base across the adjoining northeast India. Added to this is Myanmar becoming a puppet dancing on the strings of Beijing. Myanmar shares a large border with several northeastern states.

Advertisement

What do all these mean? One may argue about the possibility of ISI reaching so far; the northeastern frontier region is sabotaging India’s interests at a time when its Pakistani economy is on the verge of collapse. Call it strategy or compulsion, Pakistan can go to any extent to destroy India’s interests. Similarly, if Pakistan heaves on Chinese oxygen, Islamabad needs to prove its loyalty to China.

During the last few months, several significant incidents took place across Southeast Asia. Former Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sheikh Hasina had to leave Dhaka and take India’s asylum. However, the agitations did not stop in Bangladesh after the ouster of Hasina; rather, the movement initiated by the students converted into organised crime in the name of Islam against the Hindu and other religious minorities of Bangladesh. The radical Islamic outfit is always active in Bangladesh. The atrocities against religious minorities exposed the biting reality of Bangladesh. The intensity and the agenda, the tone and trajectory of fanatic elements, made it evidently clear that ISI and its trained militant outfits led the movement in Bangladesh. However, the most important point is the role played by the Bangladeshi army at this phase; they just let Hindus die or flee from Bangladesh.

Even Foreign Minister S Jaishankar and NSA Chief Ajit Doval did not seem proactive except in issuing a statement in the Parliament. New Delhi remained busy showing hospitality to Hasina but paid no attention to protecting the interests of religious minorities in Bangladesh. This callousness proved costly for India as the process of radicalising Bangladesh enhanced. Reports of smugglers and BDR attacking BSF came, but New Delhi hardly paid attention.

Similarly, during the last few months, particularly after the ouster of Hasina, subversive activities increased in Pakistan. The incidents like the agitation at Karachi port, the massacre in Balochistan, the atrocities against China and Pakistan across the Pakistan-China Economic Corridor (CPEC), and such others created a situation more volatile. Things are out of the control of General Asif Munir in present-day Pakistan. But those incidents made India concerned too. Naturally, attention shifted to the Indo-Pak border once again. As Baluch and Sindh atrocities increased, Pakistan strategized a counter-offensive against India, and radical Bangladesh provided ISI with a larger platform to stimulate the northeast. Things began to change in the eastern and northeastern frontiers of India. The result is obvious.

Thus the Pakistan-Bangladesh-Nagaland unholy nexus is not a scattered incident. This is a part of a larger anti-India design led by China. China has used Myanmar against India so far; it has put into use other proxies like Pakistan and Bangladesh this time. This exposes the worst policy failure on the part of New Delhi. But it would be wrong to perceive that things remain confined in Nagaland. The fresh turmoil in Manipur and volatile Nagaland show the gravity of the situation. But India has a larger concern considering religious demography across the India-Bangladesh border. Things may turn against India’s security interests in the bordering area, and this includes a substantial part of West Bengal as well.

In fact, the casual approach of New Delhi towards India’s northeastern region is the genesis of all odds. This casual approach is the outcome of prejudiced perception and utter ignorance about the region. If the leadership of a nation does not learn about one of its integral parts, this is not ignorance but utter negligence. It brings all before the mirror. Such a trust deficit is always against national interests. Reality is: the northeast is more complicated than Kashmir. This has been going on for decades. If a region remains outside the purview of the academic arena, this eventuality is unavoidable. The approach of Pakistan and Bangladesh regarding Nagaland is of larger ramification. It is a direct challenge against India’s territorial integrity. But will New Delhi act sensibly?

The writer is an independent contributor. Views expressed are personal