In a recent address, Union Home Minister Amit Shah reignited one of India’s most crucial national debates on who is a refugee and who is an infiltrator. By drawing attention to the persecution faced by Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and Buddhists in Pakistan and Bangladesh, Shah has urged the nation to revisit its ethical and constitutional responsibilities in the post-Partition era. His argument is not political posturing but a necessary call to reclaim India’s moral obligation and safeguard national interest.

To appreciate the depth of this argument, one must look back at the forgotten Nehru-Liaquat Pact of 1950. Signed in the aftermath of Partition’s humanitarian crisis, the pact was a solemn promise between India and Pakistan to protect minorities on both sides. Those who chose to stay were to be guaranteed safety, dignity, and full rights. While India largely upheld that commitment, Pakistan and later Bangladesh systematically betrayed it. Over the decades, religious minorities in these countries, particularly Hindus and Sikhs, have faced relentless persecution, forced conversions, temple desecrations, and state-sanctioned discrimination. Pakistan’s Hindu population, which once stood at about 15 per cent in 1947, has plunged to less than 2 per cent today. In Bangladesh, the Hindu population dropped from 22 per cent in 1951 to barely 7.9 per cent by 2011.

It is against this backdrop that the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), introduced by the Modi government, must be understood. Far from being exclusionary, the CAA is a humane correction of a historical injustice. It seeks to fast-track Indian citizenship for Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians who fled religious persecution in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan before 2014. These are not illegal migrants; they are refugees in the truest moral and historical sense. India, as a civilisational state rooted in compassion and pluralism, owes them protection.

In contrast, illegal infiltrators, largely economic migrants from Bangladesh and in some cases radical elements from Myanmar, enter India without any claim of persecution. Their movement is driven not by fear but by opportunity, aided by porous borders and political patronage. For decades, certain political forces have encouraged and exploited this influx to consolidate vote banks, especially in border states. This cynical manipulation of migration has strained India’s internal security, social cohesion, and demographic balance.

West Bengal and Jharkhand offer telling examples. In districts like Malda, Murshidabad, and North 24 Parganas, reports have documented demographic changes and rising influence of illegal settlers. In Jharkhand’s Santhal Parganas, tribal communities have voiced concerns about land encroachment and the erosion of their cultural identity. The deliberate blurring of lines between genuine refugees and illegal infiltrators is not a coincidence; it has been politically engineered. This conflation serves short-term electoral interests at the cost of India’s long-term stability and moral responsibility.

The demographic impact of this infiltration is visible in national data. Census figures show that India’s Hindu population fell from 84.1 per cent in 1951 to 79.8 per cent in 2011, while the Muslim population grew from 9.8 per cent to 14.2 per cent. In certain regions, the shifts are far sharper and cannot be explained by natural population growth alone. Assam, for instance, saw its Muslim population rise from 24.7 per cent in 1971 to 34.2 per cent today. Similar trends are visible in parts of Bengal, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh. These changes carry far-reaching implications that are social, economic, and political, especially in border and tribal regions where demographic balance is fragile.

Recognising the scale of this challenge, Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently announced a National Demography Mission in his 2025 Independence Day address. This mission could be transformative, offering a scientific and data-driven understanding of India’s demographic realities. If implemented with rigour, it can separate natural demographic shifts from those driven by illegal migration. It will also inform policy decisions on border security, resource planning, and social welfare while providing an empirical basis to defend India’s demographic equilibrium.

At the core of Amit Shah’s position lies a simple yet profound principle: compassion must coexist with responsibility. India has always offered refuge to those fleeing persecution, from Parsis escaping Persia to Jews fleeing Europe. But compassion cannot come at the cost of national security or social harmony. A nation must distinguish between those seeking safety and those defying its laws.

Swipe Left For Next Video

By standing firm on identifying and rehabilitating genuine refugees while ensuring action against illegal infiltrators, the Modi government is not just advancing a political agenda. It is fulfilling a moral and historical duty. The distinction between refugee and infiltrator is not merely legal; it is ethical. It defines who we are as a nation — compassionate yet self-respecting, inclusive yet secure. India must now act with both conviction and compassion.

The writer is a well-known author and national spokesperson of BJP. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.

In the soft, blurry light of a fall day in Kashmir, Saqib Ahmad’s hands are occupied with the earth, but his head is wrestling with an abstract world of promises. Working on his apple orchard on the mild slopes outside Wailoo, in north Kashmir’s Baramulla, he is speaking not as an ideologue but as a practical man measuring........

© News18