A Republic Cannot Deport, Humiliate or “Outbreed” Its Own People

“We are not from Bangladesh. We are Indian. Why did they do this to us?”

That question should shame the Indian state. On the facts as currently established, Sunali Khatun, a pregnant Indian woman, her husband, and their child were detained in Delhi, deported across an international border without due process, imprisoned in a foreign country, separated, and left to survive on charity and court orders. Their crime was not illegal entry. It was speaking Bengali, being Muslim, and being poor. This was not a mistake or overreach. It was state violence carried out through paperwork and silence.

India has procedures for suspected illegal migrants

They exist to prevent this outcome. They were ignored. There was no verification with the home state, no due process, no public record, and no accountability. A family was pushed across a border, reportedly beaten when they tried to return, and abandoned. That is not law enforcement. It is expulsion by force. When a state confuses language with nationality and religion with foreignness, it stops governing and starts hunting.

Citizenship is not a favour

It is a legal fact. India is not meant to be a blood, language, or religious state. Citizenship is defined by law, not accent or poverty. When the weakest are forced to prove citizenship under duress while the powerful are never asked, law collapses into power. This is how republics rot: not through coups, but through habits.

This is not an isolated lapse of manners towards the Muslim minority

It is the same logic in a smaller, more public form. When a Chief Minister can pull down a Muslim woman’s veil at a government appointment ceremony, and senior ministers can defend it as “show your face” patriotism, the message is clear: Muslim dignity is conditional, and visibility is enforced, not consented to. The argument is always the same. It is dressed up as procedure, security, or “rule of law,” but it operates as dominance.

Muslim Identity is seen as a National Threat

Today it is a veil tugged down in a room of officials. Yesterday it was a Bengali-speaking family pushed across a border. In both cases, the state treats Muslim identity as an offence to be corrected in public, and citizenship as something that can be suspended by suspicion. This is how discrimination becomes policy: first through humiliation, then through paperwork, then through expulsion.

Bengal, like Kashmir, is not a border zone to be cleansed

Bengali-speaking Muslims are not suspect by default. Treating whole regions and communities as provisional is not nationalism. It is sectarianism with police powers. This logic is now being justified through demography. We are told that political problems will end because people will “die out,” be “replaced,” or fade away. This is not analysis. It is genocidal thinking disguised as arithmetic. When politics becomes population math, violence is already assumed. The passive voice does the work: it says this will happen, not that someone will do it. As was gloated earlier in the comment threads (source):

Kashmiri to end up as Native Americans?

Native American did not simply “die out.” They were dispossessed, starved, removed, and broken by law and force. To cite this as a model outcome is to accept genocide so long as it is slow enough to be renamed demographic change.

The core error is simple

Demographics do not decide power. Elites do. Institutions, courts, bureaucracy, capital, culture, and international legitimacy matter more than raw numbers. Kashmir itself proves this. Even if demographics shift, locally rooted elites persist. Votes change. Elite structures endure.

Demographic obsession leads in only one direction.=

When numbers fail to deliver the promised result, the choice becomes escalation or erasure. We have already seen this logic applied to Indian citizens deported without due process. The mindset is in place. Only the scale remains undecided.