Muslim World Report

Elderly Man Dies During Deportation at Attari Border

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | May 2, 2025 1:56 PM | 7 min read | 1428 words

TL;DR: An 80-year-old man died during deportation at the Attari border, illustrating the complex relationship between citizenship, state responsibilities, and humanitarian obligations.

Editorial: The Complexities of Citizenship and Responsibility in the India-Pakistan Context

In recent discussions surrounding the plight of individuals who traverse the fraught borders between India and Pakistan, a stark reality emerges: the obligations of citizenship cannot be bent to accommodate the emotional narratives surrounding individual cases. A poignant example of this is the story of a young man who chose death over life in Pakistan—an act that underscores both personal tragedy and a broader commentary on the responsibilities that nation-states owe to their citizens.

It is essential to recognize that the primary responsibility for the welfare of any citizen lies with their government. In this case, the young man, who failed to attain Indian citizenship, found himself in a precarious situation. However, it is crucial to emphasize that the onus of care does not rest solely on India. This reality is often obscured by emotional appeals that tend to overlook the legal and moral frameworks that govern citizenship.

  • Key Points:
    • Citizenship is not merely a matter of personal belonging.
    • It is deeply embedded within a complex web of rights and responsibilities.

Scholars note that citizenship dictates the relationships between individuals and the state (Soysal, 2012; Meyer & Rowan, 1977).

For instance:

  • What if India’s citizenship policies were more flexible?
  • Would individuals like the young man find a refuge?

Such hypotheticals raise questions about the balance between national sovereignty and humanitarian obligations. While the emotional weight of personal stories is compelling, the implications of altering citizenship practices warrant careful scrutiny. An expansive interpretation of citizenship could inadvertently undermine the legal frameworks that secure a nation’s identity and sovereignty.

Emotional Appeals and Practical Realities

The sentiment arising from this narrative—that India should extend its protective umbrella to non-citizens—requires reevaluation. India is already grappling with significant internal challenges, including:

  • Economic hardships
  • Pressing social welfare demands

The suggestion that India should provide services or protections for those lacking citizenship raises critical questions about resource allocation and the prioritization of its own citizens’ needs.

Consider this:

  • What if India were to redirect more resources to address the needs of its own citizens first?
  • Would this lead to a more stable society with reduced tension over community resources?

Prioritizing Indian citizens in times of crisis may bolster national security and create a stronger foundation for social cohesion. Simply put, India cannot function as a social safety net for individuals who have not been granted the rights and privileges of citizenship. Advocating for such a stance neglects the complexities of governance in contemporary nation-states.

The Governance Crisis in Pakistan

Moreover, the historical context of Pakistan’s handling of its own citizens cannot be ignored. The longstanding issues of terrorism and the refusal to repatriate individuals who find themselves in limbo only serve to exacerbate the situation (Jacob, 2011).

A critical thought:

  • Had Pakistan prioritized the welfare of its citizens and addressed these systemic issues, many individuals might not have faced such dire predicaments.

What if Pakistan were to reform its governance structures? Such reforms could:

  • Significantly improve the welfare of its citizens
  • Prevent tragic outcomes like the young man’s choice

A proactive approach could mitigate feelings of betrayal among citizens and foster a sense of national loyalty. The heartbreaking decisions that some individuals are forced to make reflect failures within their own nation’s governance structures (Weiner, 1993; Jalal, 2015).

Border Security and Sovereignty

The situation at the borders raises important questions about state sovereignty and border security. The Border Security Force (BSF) must be equipped with the authority to respond effectively to incursions. The ongoing harassment of BSF personnel highlights the need for stringent measures to safeguard national sovereignty.

Key considerations include:

  • The challenges at the border are not merely bureaucratic; they also involve the safety and security of a nation that has endured decades of tension and conflict (Talbot, 2003).
  • What if India were to strengthen its border security further? Increased military presence and enhanced technology might stabilize border tensions but could also escalate violence and conflict in the region.

Conversely:

  • If India were to relax border controls, would that provide a solution for those seeking asylum or refuge?

This hypothetical raises the risk of uncontrolled migration, potentially straining the resources of the state and fostering social unrest among existing citizens.

The Role of Emotions in Policy Making

It is imperative that we approach these discussions with a clear understanding of the legal frameworks that govern citizenship and the responsibilities of nation-states. Emotions, while valid, must not cloud the realities of governance and responsibility.

India cannot afford to shoulder the burdens arising from the failures of another state. Instead, we must advocate for policies that:

  • Prioritize the rights and welfare of our citizens
  • Recognize the complexities of cross-border issues and the moral imperatives that accompany them (Denhardt & Denhardt, 2000; Fanning & Veale, 2004).

Yet, what if we were to view emotional appeals as a catalyst for policy change? Could they inspire a new framework that more effectively addresses humanitarian concerns while still upholding legal citizenship requirements? Emotion-driven policies could bridge the gap between personal narratives and bureaucratic processes, creating a more compassionate governance ethos.

The Interplay of National Identity and Responsibility

The discourse surrounding citizenship further complicates the dynamic between national identity and responsibility. The narrative surrounding the young man’s tragic choice raises essential questions about what it means to belong to a nation.

  • Key Points to Consider:
    • Citizenship is not merely a legal status; it encompasses a sense of belonging.
    • It reflects shared identity and mutual responsibility.

What if we were to redefine citizenship in a way that incorporates a broader understanding of human rights? Such a redefinition could potentially allow non-citizens access to certain protections without compromising the integrity of national identity. This could foster a spirit of solidarity while maintaining the nation-state’s core responsibilities toward its citizens.

However, this also challenges the conventional understanding of citizenship. Critics might argue that extending rights to non-citizens undermines the very essence of citizenship, creating ambiguity in a legal context that is meant to define the relationship between the state and its people.

International Perspectives on Citizenship

The responsibilities of nation-states are not limited to internal governance; they also extend to international obligations. As nations grapple with global issues such as migration, climate change, and international terror, the question arises: how can states balance these external pressures while maintaining sovereignty?

  • What if international bodies played a more significant role in mediating these cross-border challenges?
  • Could collaborative frameworks provide a solution that addresses the humanitarian needs of individuals without compromising national security?

Global cooperation could pave the way for shared resources and responsibility, fostering a more integrated understanding of citizenship that transcends borders. Conversely, increased reliance on international bodies could lead to tensions over national sovereignty.

If countries believe that their borders and policies are dictated by foreign influences, the backlash could undermine international cooperation. The dilemma rests on finding the delicate balance between international collaboration and national integrity, a challenge that demands thoughtful negotiation and dialogue.

Conclusion

The situation at the borders between India and Pakistan is emblematic of broader questions regarding citizenship, responsibility, and the interplay of national identity. As we navigate these complexities, it is crucial to maintain a nuanced perspective that recognizes:

  • The legal frameworks governing citizenship
  • The emotional narratives that drive policy discussions

It is only through such an approach that we can foster solutions that respect both individual human dignity and the sovereign rights of nations.

References

  • Denhardt, R. B., & Denhardt, J. V. (2000). The new public service: Serving rather than steering. Public Administration Review, 60(6), 549-559.
  • Fanning, R., & Veale, A. (2004). Citizenship and social exclusion in Ireland: An overview. Irish Social Policy Association.
  • Jacob, J. (2011). The futility of territorial nationalism: Pakistan’s governance crisis. International Affairs Review.
  • Jalal, A. (2015). The struggle for Pakistan: A Muslim homeland and global politics. Harvard University Press.
  • Kickbusch, I., Pelikan, J., Apfel, F., & Tsouros, A. D. (2016). Health literacy: The solid facts. World Health Organization.
  • Meyer, M. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure and rationality. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
  • Soysal, Y. N. (2012). Citizenship in the global age: The relationship between citizenship and global migration. International Sociology, 27(2), 154-174.
  • Talbot, I. (2003). Pakistan: A modern history. Macmillan.
  • Weiner, M. (1993). The politics of citizenship in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 28(12), 594-602.
  • Stern, S. (2000). Citizenship in a globalizing world: The challenge of migration. Global Ethics Review.
← Prev Next →