Backstory: The Disappearance of Media Stories on the Disappeared Points to a Cruel Future
Pamela Philipose
Earlier this year, the sight of Indians deemed “illegal” by the US government under President Donald Trump and peremptorily sent back in a US military aircraft to India, manacled and shackled, created widespread outrage in the country. Headlines like ‘Indian Illegal Migrants Deported From US Tell Their Tales Of Abuse’ marked the accompanying flood of media coverage.
In sharp contrast, the Indian government’s renewed attempts to push out Rohingya and Bangladeshis who have fled to India, into the shadow lands and waters bordering neighbouring countries, have been met by a conspicuous media silence.
So rarely has there been any incisive, or even just plain, reportage on the issue, that when the Indian Express carried a front page report on May 20, headlined ‘In last 6 months, at least 770 from Delhi alone deported to Bangladesh as part of crackdown’, it came as a shock.
While there may have been unconfirmed information floating around that a few individuals deemed to be Bangladeshi or Rohingya have been pushed across the Bangladesh or Myanmar borders, nobody knew that there was an actual “crackdown”, and nobody suspected that the number of those so deported had touched “at least 770”.
The forced evacuation of such a large cohort is alarming in a democratic country. It signals a breakdown of moral and ethical codes that had at one point in its history marked the country’s response to those seeking shelter within its shores for their survival.
There are five reasons why such developments do not capture empathetic media attention and why stories of the disappeared are literally disappeared from media coverage.
First is the confusion of semantics, which in turn has clouded public understanding of who exactly constitute this unusually variegated group. India, after all, has not signed the Refugee Convention of 1951, so what is the legal framework by which to perceive a bewildering range of people who could be deemed as foreigners, refugees, the internally displaced, economic migrants, or even environmental refugees?
Secondly, precisely because of this lack of a legal framework, they can be framed in dark shades as criminals or illegals, depending on political expediency. The use of terms like ‘infiltrators’, ‘terrorists’, ‘militants’ and even ‘termites’ (as the home minister once characterised them), only serves to dehumanise them further and invest them with an unverifiable patina of diabolism.
Thirdly, what has made the confusion worse is the prism of communalism through which these communities have come to be viewed, particularly after the enactment of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. While those regarded as “our migrants” enjoy fast-tracked citizenship, particularly harsh treatment is meted out to “their migrants”, which includes police repression, vigilante persecution and summary expulsion.
Also read | ‘Thrown Into the Sea’: How India Allegedly Deported 38 Rohingya Refugees Without Due Process
Fourthly, over a period of time, this amalgam of untenable formulations, hate speech for electoral purposes and systematic stigmatisation has led to sections of the Indian population and media professionals left incapable of adopting a more rational approach to the issue. Some have even become convinced that the undocumented pose an imminent threat to their own security and that of the state – again without offering a shred of proof.
When a few thousand Rohingya settled in Jammu came under the scanner, the cry went out that their crimes would need to be publicised. The long and elaborate compilation exercise that followed revealed no evidence of any major crime or security threat perpetrated by the frightened community.
Big power projections comprise the fifth factor. Israel’s deliberate and strategic take-no-prisoners approach in Gaza, which could lead to the near annihilation of an entire population, has unfortunately come to be seen by many within the Indian media, not as the genocide it is but as the template that India needs to adopt to emerge as a “strong state”.
In the process, the capacity to accommodate, assimilate and absorb diversity and difference to a level unparalleled anywhere in the world, which had made India what it is today, is in danger of being lost forever. The centuries’ old belief, atithi devo bhava (guest is akin to god), is now robbed of any meaning and remains an empty shibboleth to be mouthed at the international summits that India hosts, and forgotten thereafter.
Today, as a result, we have a media that is willing to stomach extraordinary levels of state-driven cruelty meted out to helpless communities of stateless people in the name of national interest. The legacy media may even get reliable information about atrocities being committed against them, but they will do nothing about it.
Once in a way, a newspaper like the Indian Express may flash stories of this kind on its front page, but for hundreds of news channels and thousands of “large” newspapers, this is not what makes news.
In early May, when 38 Rohingya men, women and children were allegedly detained by the Delhi police on the pretext of getting their biometrics done; herded into a holding centre; taken to Port Blair; transferred to an Indian naval vessel; beaten; given life jackets and then pushed into the sea fringing Myanmar, with no legal process being followed whatsoever and in violation of international and national law, the stray reports that surfaced were only on social media.
When a petition on this case was taken before the justices of the Supreme Court, they termed it a ‘fanciful idea’ and dismissed it out of hand. Such plausible deniability would not have been possible if the media had taken such information with the seriousness it demanded.
What does this mean for the future? The process of othering is unlikely to stop at the hapless stateless. The persecutors and prosecutors will find new communities to target, new ways to make those who are “insiders” today into “outsiders” tomorrow, with the media willingly playing the role of accessory to the crime. It is a cruel future that awaits us.
§
Thoughts on World Environment Day
Today, the impacts of environmental destruction are widely known, partly because there is far greater media coverage of issues like climate change and ecological destruction than was the case earlier. But it has been a long, bumpy journey.
The first international conference hosted by the United Nations, the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment, was held in 1972 and it proclaimed to the world that “Man is both creature and moulder of his environment, which gives him physical sustenance and affords him the opportunity for intellectual, moral, social and spiritual growth.”
There was that ring of anachronism interlacing those words in the way it privileged the male gender, but even more conspicuous was the misplaced optimism that they evoked: “through the rapid acceleration of science and technology, man has acquired the power to transform his environment in countless ways and on an unprecedented scale.”
The fear amongst the countries in the South at that juncture was that an agenda of “conservation”, the buzz word of the era, would be at the cost of “development”, or the attempts of the poorer parts of the globe, labelled unambiguously as the “underdeveloped world”, to improve its prospects.
Two decades later, another international conference on the environment, this time at Rio, saw the North-South divide get even more pronounced and its articulation more sophisticated. When emissions of cattle and the methane generated by rice fields were cited in a report from the Washington-based World Resources Institute as a major contributor to pollution, Indian environmentalists pushed back.
Anil Agrawal and Sunita Narain from the Centre for Science and Environment Delhi observed:
“Can we really equate the CO2 contributions of gas-guzzling automobiles in Europe and North America or, for that matter, anywhere in the Third World with the methane emissions of draught cattle and rice fields of subsistence farmers in West Bengal or Thailand? Do these people not have a right to live? But no effort has been made in WRI’s report to separate out the ‘survival emissions’ of the poor, from the ‘luxury emissions’ of the rich.”
This observation did not of course take into adequate consideration the ‘luxury emissions’ of the rich in the poorer countries, or the emissions of “poorer countries” seeking to achieve First World arsenals.
Ultimately, there was no getting away from the fact that everyone on the planet, whether from the North or the South, whether from the developed world or the developing world, needed to get more aware of just what was happening to their environment at the national and international levels.
It was this spirit that egged a group of concerned scientists, environmentalists and journalists to come together in 1982 to produce a citizens’ report, edited by Anil Agarwal, Ravi Chopra and Kalpana Sharma on the ‘The State of India’s Environment’.
What was striking about this volume – dedicated to the women of Chamoli – was how far ahead of its times it was, not just by being the first publication of its kind brought out by concerned citizens under the banner of the Centre for Science and Environment, but the effort it took to put across complex issues in a readable, usable style through quality design and the wide use of data, infographics and illustrations.
There was also a liberal sprinkling of “not-so-fun facts” (“70 per cent of all the available water in India is polluted. About 73 million workdays are lost due to water-related diseases”). Many of those associated with the publication are no longer with us.
They include Anil Agrawal, the passionate prime mover of this effort; Anupam Mishra, the Gandhian water conservationist; newspaper editor Darryl D’Monte; and Smitu Kothari, ecologist and author. Others went on to achieve personal milestones, many in the environmental field.
Today, as we mark yet another World Environment Day (on June 5), it may be worth our while to revisit a paragraph in the introduction to this volume:
“Most of us come to know of environmental problems and effects in a piecemeal manner. But when we read this overview of the state of the nation’s rivers, dams, forests, air, soil, plants, animals, towns, village, health and energy problems, the impact is certainly overwhelming.”
It comes as a reminder that our journalism on the environment also cannot exist in silos and needs to keep the larger backdrop of climate change within its sights.
As Sanjay Asthana recalled in the elegant environmental portal, Mongabay, the efforts made by students and environmentalists to protect the priceless 400-acre forest of Kancha Gachibowli adjoining Hyderabad University were invaluable. The courts woke up to the destruction too late. He recalled how that patch of forest had educated him on the local biophysical sphere as a young PhD scholar.
Ecological destruction is happening in plain sight and if we don’t have the information and words to push back against the onslaught, posterity will never forgive us.
§
Readers write in…
Conversations that educate
Santosh Gade writes on The Interview with Karan Thapar (excerpts)…
“As I reflect on the profound impact your work has had on my perspective and understanding, by and large, of the world and India in particular, I am filled with a sense of awe and reverence for the exceptional journalistic endeavors you have undertaken. Your series of interviews-- The Interview with Karan Thapar--for The Wire, in addition to Devil's Advocate, Hard Talk India in the past with individuals from diverse spheres of life, are a masterclass in journalistic excellence, and I am deeply humbled to call myself an ardent admirer of your craft…
“What sets you apart, in my opinion, is your unique ability to create a space for meaningful dialogue, where ideas can be exchanged, and perspectives can be challenged. Your thoughtful reflections and insightful questions not only inform but also inspire critical thinking, encouraging us to reflect on our own values and principles.
“Your most recent conversation with Avay Shukla for the Wire (May 27) on the moral decline of our society metaphorically making us a Duffer Zone and the struggles faced by the intellectually liberal and spirited individuals resonated deeply with me. The way you navigated the complexities of this topic, shedding light on the duffer zone that many find themselves in, was nothing short of remarkable. The manner in which you teased out the author's thoughts on this pressing issue, and the ensuing discussion, was delightful yet enlightening and thought-provoking…
“Please continue to share your gift with the world. Your work has the power to inspire, educate, and challenge us, and I am grateful for the opportunity to engage with your ideas and perspectives.”
Civility in the civic space
Murali Reddy from New Albany, USA, however, expresses disappointment with a recent episode from The Interview...
“A recent episode featuring Mr. Karan Thapar and former Ambassador Hussein Haqqani was disappointing (May 20). Given the recent escalation in border tensions, particularly following the tragic killing of innocent tourists in Pahalgam, I was eager to hear Ambassador Haqqani’s perspectives on the situation. Unfortunately, throughout the conversation, Mr. Thapar interrupted his guest far too frequently. Instead of allowing Ambassador Haqqani to share his insights on the current crisis, Mr. Thapar often interjected, lectured, and appeared intent on compelling him to take a particular stance. This approach detracted from what could have been a meaningful and constructive exchange.
“Ambassador Haqqani is one of the few moderate voices advocating for rational dialogue between the two countries. His measured perspective is especially important at a time like this, and I had hoped to hear more from him during the discussion. As a longtime admirer of The Wire and its commitment to high-quality journalism, I found this episode to fall short of the standards I have come to expect from it. I hope Mr. Thapar might consider inviting Ambassador Haqqani back for a fuller, more respectful, conversation—one that allows for uninterrupted, thoughtful dialogue. A rational and open exchange is what we need now more than ever.
“Polarisation in civic space has corroded democracy in America, my adopted country. I'd very much like civility to prevail in public conversation in India.”
Crores, not millions
Adhiraj, coordinator, NREGA Sangharsh Morcha, makes a correction…
“I would like to flag an error I noticed in the Wire article titled, ‘Demand For Work Under MGNREGS Goes Up, Actual Job Creation Declines: Report’ (May 20). It mentioned that “according to the data from the ministry of rural development, 20.12 million rural households were among those who sought employment under the scheme in April. The figure slightly increased to 20.37 million in May (till May 18), reported Mint."
The figures in bold (20.12 million and 20.37 million) should be in crores not in millions.”
Facts about Odisha
Deba Mohanty writes in…
“This is with regard to the Wire video, https://youtu.be/iTeAtnGweuE?si=Z65cANbns6UXKkVO While it is good, it has some misinformation about Odisha. Odisha now ranks above Bengal in per capita income and it is also opposing delimitation. Its population has registered a declining trend as the female fertility rate is around 1.8. Replacement levels require a country/state to have a female fertility rate of 2.1. The fertility of women in Tamil Nadu has touched an even lower 1.5 something. I think your research team didn't present the statistic correctly. Remember, around the year 2000, Odisha was poorest/second poorest state of the country.”
Write to ombudsperson@thewire.in.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
