Securitization of refugees in South Asia: Through the prism of Kautilya’s Arthashastra
| Author | Murali Gopalakrishnan |
| Published date | 01 December 2020 |
| Date | 01 December 2020 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/2057891119881505 |
| Subject Matter | Research articles |
Research article
Securitization of refugees in
South Asia: Through the prism
of Kautilya’s Arthashastra
Murali Gopalakrishnan
University of Madras, India
Abstract
The acceptance of refugees and internally displaced persons represents the altruism of the
countries of South Asia, which has witnessed the phenomenon of displaced persons since the early
19th century. The refugee phenomenon has a causal nature and will remain for a long time to
come. The refugee situation in South Asia since 1947 has also resulted in protracted internal
security conditions in India, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. The dual paradigm of ref-
ugees for a host country – societal concerns and security issues – can be resolved by adopting the
Kautilyan Arthashastra (a treatise written around the turn of 4 BC) model of empowerment and
integration for outsiders and his philosophy on securing society both from external and internal
threats. Modern thinkers such as Plessner on anthropological behaviour, and critical security
theories by Welsh and Booth, corroborate the ideas of Arthashastra. Given the prevailing global
perception of refugees, the UNHCR articulation of durable solutions with a multilateral frame-
work of understanding (MFU) among nations is a viable long-term solution. Given the peculiarities
of South Asian economies, the article recommends that the long-term answer to the refugee crisis
lies in an empowerment model and within the framework of collective decision-making of regional
institutions such as BIMSTEC/SAARC for a coordinated and cooperative platform.
Keywords
Arthashastra, Kautilya, migration, refugee, security
Introduction
The South Asia region, consisting of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal,
Pakistan and Sri Lanka, has been one of the major theatres of the global refugee movement.
Refugees and the migration of people have a causal nature, ranging from conflict to alienation
to a demand for political autonomy. South Asia has historically been benevolent to the homeless.
Corresponding author:
Murali Gopalakrishnan, University of Madras, Navalar Nagar, Chepauk, Triplicane, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600005, India.
Email: 1muraligopalakrishnan@gmail.com
Asian Journal of Comparative Politics
2020, Vol. 5(4) 400–415
ªThe Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/2057891119881505
journals.sagepub.com/home/acp
None of the countries are, however, signatories to the UN charter on refugees/migrants. India has
open, as well as virtually open, borders with all neighbouring countries, except China and Pakistan,
which has facilitated the migratory flow of people.
Within South Asia, there are donor countries and acceptors of refugees and migrants. Afghani-
stan is a donor while Pakistan, India and Bangladesh in the recent past have been acceptors. The
refugees’ populace, which comprises traumatized homeless people, has suffered prosecution and
discrimination. The vulnerability of the refugees makes them an easy group for exploitation. The
internal dimensions of NGOs and human rights groups, which play into the hands of those with
fundamentalist leanings in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan, are a matter of great concern. The
issue, therefore, is a matter of recognition of refugees’ crises and adaption of a collective policy by
the South Asian neighbours to settle the refugees with dignity.
Chanakya’s Arthashastra, written around 4 to 3 BC, is a treatise on political theory and
international relations. It is a theoretical and normative work, yet captures the modern ideas on
political realism of Morgenthau, Weber and Plessner, all of whom recognize the importance of
Kautilya in their writings. With particular reference to the subject of refugees, Kautilya explains
the behavioural science of a diverse population and describes measures to deal with outsiders.
According to Kautilya, a migrant cannot be expected to have loyalties to the king and therefore has
to be regulated and known to the administration. The theoretical engagement with Kautilyan ideas
and concepts and their induction into political science discou rse is a desideratum in political
science (Liebig, 2014). The article attempts to illustrate text-immanent concept clusters of the
Arthashastra with the analogous categories of modern-day political puzzles such as refugees and
human migration. Authoritative translations of the Sanskrit texts by Indologists have been relied
upon to contextualize the issue.
The article describes the extent of refugee migration, identifies the issues connected with them
and discusses its impact on the internal security of a nation. The second part analyses the theore-
tical framework provided by Arthashastra on the importance of internal security, the handling of
foreigners and the type of foreign policy to be adopted, with specific reference to India, as well as
its comparison with modern thinkers on the subject. A nation can realize the importance of the
refugee crises if it follows a process of securitization. Securitization is an enabling process to
identify threats and it qualifies threats as a social con struct. The connection between modern
securitization theory and Kautilya lies in the very definition of security given in the Arthashastra.
Finally, the elements of the solution lie in a policy framework which contextualizes refugees with
adoption in a regional environment provided by organizations such as BIMSTEC and SAARC.
In the present day, refugee protection and national security have to be contextualized together
and not become conflicting goals. The ‘inevitability’ of incorporating refugees in the narrower
domestic politics and more extensive foreign policy apparatus has often deprived refugees of the
rightful attention and solutions to their plights (Mahendra, 2011).
There is an unprecedented displacement of people the world over. As per figures quoted in a
UNHCR (2016) report, by the end of 2016, there were 65.6 million forcibly displaced people
worldwide as a result of persecution, conflict, violence or human rights violation. This phenom-
enon has shown an upward trend since 1997. The spurt in the global population of forcibly
displaced persons was witnessed from 2012 to 2015, primarily as a result of the conflict in the
Middle East and Africa, and is a recent phenomenon. South Asia, on the other hand, has been
witness to large-scale movement of its population since Indian independence. The present Rohin-
gya crisis has its roots in the British colonial era, to the extent that the British can be said to have
aided and abetted the problem. The problem today is the legacy of their policy of empowering
Gopalakrishnan 401
To continue reading
Request your trial