India, the cradle of one of the world’s oldest civilisations, has always been more than a geographical entity. It is a cultural and spiritual homeland that has shaped the lives and identities of billions. Yet, the violent partition of 1947 ripped apart its fabric, creating unnatural borders and consigning millions to an uncertain future. Among the most tragic consequences was the plight of Hindus in East Bengal (now Bangladesh), who found themselves cut off from their ancestral homeland and subjected to decades of systemic persecution.

Today, as the torchbearer of the Indic civilization, India must ask itself: does it not have a moral and historical obligation to protect the Hindus of Bangladesh and other regions once part of Bharat? If necessary, should it not be prepared to use its armed forces to ensure their survival and dignity?  If India is willing and able to protect Sanatan Dharma outside her forced-made and cunningly architected boundaries, only then can she ensure its protection and flourishing within those boundaries.

The Case for Intervention

Historical Betrayal and Responsibilits

Partition was never a choice made by the masses; it was a political and selfish decision driven by greed, desires, and the lust for power of a few that was imposed on them. Hindus in East Bengal were unwittingly left to fend for themselves in a Muslim-majority state, where they were systematically marginalised and reduced from nearly 30% of the population in 1947 to less than 10% today. The blood of their ancestors, shed in the fight against colonialism, cries out for justice. India, as the motherland, has a duty to correct this historical wrong.

Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing

The Hindu minority in Bangladesh has endured waves of ethnic cleansing, forced conversions, destruction of temples, and illegal land grabs. These atrocities meet the criteria of genocide under international law. India's silence risks complicity. If international mechanisms fail to act, India must take unilateral steps, including military intervention, to prevent the extinction of its cultural kin.

Recent developments in Bangladesh have raised serious concerns about the safety and rights of Hindus in the country. With the overthrow of the Sheikh Hasina government and the establishment of a new government, Islamist groups have taken advantage of the political instability. Reports indicate an increase in violence targeting Hindu communities, including arson, physical attacks, and abductions, often with impunity.

A notable case involves widespread attacks on Hindu villages, where mobs have set homes on fire and displaced families. Video evidence and eyewitness accounts suggest systemic targeting of minorities during this period of political uncertainty. Additionally, a rally of 30,000 Hindus demanded protection, highlighting the community's fear and dissatisfaction with the lack of government action to curb these atrocities.

These events have reignited debates about India's role in safeguarding Hindus in neighbouring countries. Many argue that as the former parts of undivided India, regions like Bangladesh have a shared history with India, which obliges the Indian government to intervene diplomatically or otherwise to prevent such violence.

International Precedents for Humanitarian Intervention

History provides examples where nations have used force to protect oppressed populations:

1. NATO’s intervention in Kosovo (1999): To prevent ethnic cleansing of Albanians.
2. India’s own intervention in Bangladesh (1971): When the Pakistani army unleashed atrocities on Bengali Hindus and Muslims, India intervened, liberating Bangladesh and saving millions.
3. Russia’s intervention in Crimea (2014): Justified as protecting ethnic Russians, despite international criticism.

If these precedents exist, why should India not act to save Hindus from systematic annihilation in Bangladesh?

Strategic and Security Imperatives

The persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh and other regions destabilises India’s borders, causing refugee influxes and communal tensions. By intervening decisively, India can establish a buffer against extremism and ensure regional stability. Additionally, demonstrating resolve will deter other nations from mistreating minorities of Indian origin.

Moral and Civilisational Leadership

India is not just a nation-state; it is a beacon of Dharma (righteousness). If India does not protect Hindus, who will? The global Hindu diaspora looks to India for leadership and protection. By intervening, India would reaffirm its role as the guardian of its civilisation and values.

The Pragmatics of Military Action

A. Diplomatic Preparation

Before any intervention, India must exhaust all diplomatic channels. Presenting the case to the United Nations and securing regional and global support would strengthen its moral and legal standing.

B. Targeted Military Operations

India’s military intervention should be precise and humanitarian in nature:

1. Establishing safe zones for Hindus within Bangladesh.
2. Deploying forces to protect areas of historical and cultural significance.
3. Neutralising extremist groups responsible for persecution.

C. Reconstruction and Reintegration

Post-intervention, India should work with Bangladesh to rebuild minority communities, ensuring long-term stability and coexistence.

Challenges and Counterarguments

Sovereignty and International Law

Critics may argue that intervention violates Bangladesh’s sovereignty. However, sovereignty is not a shield for genocide. India’s actions would be grounded in the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, which justifies intervention when a state fails to protect its citizens.

Risk of Escalation

Military action could strain India-Bangladesh relations or draw international condemnation. However, decisive leadership often demands taking risks for a greater cause.

Domestic Backlash

Some may view such intervention as religiously motivated. India must emphasise its commitment to universal human rights, extending its protective umbrella to all persecuted minorities.

A Vision for Justice

India’s intervention to protect Hindus in Bangladesh would not be an act of aggression but a fulfillment of its historical and civilisational duty. It would send a powerful message that Bharat Mata (Mother India) does not abandon her children, no matter where they reside.

The time has come for India to rise as a protector of Dharma, a beacon of hope for the oppressed, and a force for justice in the region. By acting decisively, India can not only save lives but also redefine its role on the global stage as a defender of humanity.

In conclusion, this narrative argues that military intervention, though a last resort, is sometimes necessary to uphold justice and protect vulnerable populations. India's historical responsibility, its moral stature as a civilisational leader, and its strategic imperatives make the protection of Hindus and other persecuted minorities in regions like Bangladesh a matter of urgent priority.

India must carefully weigh its options but should not shy away from its responsibility to safeguard Hindus and other minorities in regions that were once part of its territory. If India is willing and able to protect Sanatan Dharma outside her forced-made and cunningly architected boundaries, only then can she ensure its protection and flourishing within those boundaries.

By taking decisive and measured action, India has the opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to Dharma, justice, and humanity, securing its place as a beacon of hope for the oppressed and re-establishing its role as a global leader in defending universal rights.

Acknowledgement:  Artwork by Pranab Phauzdar (Phauzdar.com)

References

1. Ethnic Cleansing and Demographic Decline

Bhattacharya, S. "The Vanishing Hindus of Bangladesh." India Today, October 2023.

2. Recent Violence Against Hindus in Bangladesh

1. "Attacks on Hindu Communities Amid Political Instability." The Hindu, November 2024.
2. "Rising Extremism Post Sheikh Hasina Resignation." Al Jazeera, November 2024.

3. Historical Precedents of Intervention

1. Brown, D. "Kosovo and the Ethics of NATO's Intervention." The Atlantic, May 2000.
2. "India's Role in Bangladesh Liberation War." BBC News, December 2011.

4. Human Rights and Responsibility to Protect (R2P)

1. "The Responsibility to Protect Doctrine: An Overview." United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect.
2. Amnesty International. "Bangladesh: Minority Rights and Systemic Discrimination."
   •  

5. India’s Strategic and Moral Role

Mitra, S. "India as the Global Protector of Dharma." Indian Express, January 2024.

6. Legal Justifications for Intervention

Murphy, S. "Sovereignty vs. Human Rights: A Global Dilemma." Journal of International Law, Vol. 22, Issue 3, 2019.