![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This article looks at the lingering complexities of the Indian partition and the current state of refugees in south Asia. More specifically, it deals with one of the most marginal segments known as the Urdu-speaking Bihari’s living in Bangladesh. We trace the arcs of migration, prosperity and dispossession in the life histories of an extended family with two households characteristic of a particular refugee camp, that feature in many mega-cities today. The article plots this in the background of transformation of Dhaka and the metamorphosis of neighborhoods that house the camp. We focuse on details that one may understand in terms of Agamben’s “state of exception.” However, we make a case for a critical difference between “bare life” and a political form of behavior distinctive of the refugees. Their frantic struggle to exist in the middle of exception involves a ‘camouflage’ by constant shuffling of identities but that also means destabilizing their selfhood and a being in transit that may well become permanent.
Acknowledgement
I take this opportunity to thank Prof. Nazrul Islam at the Centre for Urban Studies, Prof. Abrar Chowdhury, and Prof. Ahmed Kamal at the University of Dhaka for their invaluable help. I am deeply indebted to Hayat Mahmud and Lopamudra Mahmud for extending their affection and friendship. Shawon Akand warmly hosted me in my later visits, helped with sources, local contacts and offered invaluable insights on the changes of Dhaka. I cannot thank Khaled Hussain and Fuad Naser enough for their advice and assistance at different sites in Mohammadpur and Mirpur. The last round of fieldwork was made possible by a research grant from the Global Suburbanisms project housed in York University, Toronto, and a shared project with Shubhra Gururani. I am grateful to the project for making this work possible. I also thank my two anonymous reviewers and the reviewing editor for the excellent comments and suggestions for revisions that helped to enrich the manuscript. I am also indebted to Krishanu B. Neog and Anasma Gayari for helping out with formatting and copy edits of the draft at the final stage.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 “Since 1972, the ‘Bihari’ camps in Bangladesh have certainly functioned as ‘states of exception’ in ‘formal’ juridical terms.” Victoria Redclift (Citation2013, 323).
2 A. F. A. Hussain (Citation1956, 40), cited in Ghoshal (Citation2018, 72).
3 Statistics and Informatics Division, Ministry of Planning, Dhaka, Bangladesh Population Census Report 1991, (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 1991).
4 Statistics and Informatics Division, Ministry of Planning, Dhaka, Bangladesh Population and Housing Census 2011, National Report, vol. 4, (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 1991).
5 Al Falah Bangladesh (Citation2006).
6 Abid Khan and others v. Government of Bangladesh and others, Writ Petition No. 3831 of 2001, (Bangladesh: Supreme Court, 5 March 2003), and Md. Sadaqat khan (Fakku) and Others vs. Chief Election Commissioner, Bangladesh Election Commission, Writ Petition No. 10129 of 2007, (Bangladesh: Supreme Court, 18 May 2008).
7 “It’s very easy to hide your address and cast your vote … I have also had a passport for 11 years with which I have visited India 10/12 times” by “managing the police,” in Victoria Redclift (Citation2013, 316–7).
8 Personal communication with Fuad Naser, Inhabitant of Mirpur camp, online, October 2022.
9 “Movement outside the camps, or the decision to acquire a ‘fake’ ID card, could both be seen as ‘acts of citizenship’ in the sense that they are about claiming rights, enacting oneself as a citizen” Redclift (Citation2013, 314).
10 Such opinion is strengthened by certain signposted past events. As Redclift informs, “in 1972 the camp community were surveyed by the ICRC and asked to choose between settlement in Bangladesh, or so-called ‘repatriation’ to (West) Pakistan, a country most had never seen. Such allegiance was apparently expressed by 60% of the camp-dwelling community in opting for settlement in Pakistan, resulting in the disqualification of all camp residents.” Victoria Redclift (Citation2011, 36).
11 “Some Urdu-speakers reinforce a cultural identity that distinguishes them from the Bengali majority, while others embrace a ‘Bangladeshi’ identification, seeking an ‘assimilation’ through which they can mask their stigmatising Urdu ancestry.” Ibid, 42.
12 “Some Urdu-speakers reinforce a cultural identity that distinguishes them from the Bengali majority, while others embrace a ‘Bangladeshi’ identification, seeking an ‘assimilation’ through which they can mask their stigmatising Urdu ancestry.” Victoria Redclift (Citation2011, 42).
13 “Since the 2008 High Court ruling, national ID cards have been distributed to ‘Urdu-speakers’ living in the camps … Unexpectedly, however, this research discovered that the majority of these ‘camp-based’ individuals had acquired ID cards, and even passports, long before the ruling based on fake or a relative’s address.” Victoria Redclift (Citation2013, 318).