vivek issues n options june 2013

7/28/2019 Vivek Issues n Options June 2013

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/vivek-issues-n-options-june-2013 1/47

Chinese PM Li's Visit

India-Japan Relations Indian Media's Priorities

Reforming Indian Police

and many more …. Published By : Vivekananda International Foundation3, San Martin Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi – 110021, [email protected], www.vifindia.org

http://www.vifindia.org/

http://www.vifindia.org/



VIVEK : Issues and Options June – 2013 Issue: II No: VI 2

Lip Service Is Still Being Paid ToDefence Indigenisation

- Brig (Retd) Gurmeet Kanwal

Indian Media Must Review Its

Priorities

- K G Suresh

EVENTS

Visit Of Delegation From RCDS, UK

To VIF

Vimarsha On Islamic Radicalism In

South Asia – Implications For Indi

Editor’s Note

ARTICLES

hinese Premier Li’s Visit To India:

ngaging To Contain

- Brig (Retd) Vinod Anand

Prime Minister Singh’s Visit And India-

apan Relations

- Prof. G V C Naidu

The Pakistan Factor In India’s

Afghanistan Policy

- Monish Gulati

The Art Of A Bloodless War

- Kanwal Sibal

arabjit Singh: Execution By Murder

- Sushant Sareen

Reforming The Indian Police

- Dr M N Buch

Contents

3

4

11

16

21

23

46

3

3

43

26

http://www.vifindia.org/authro/prof-g-v-c-naidu

http://www.vifindia.org/author/monish-gulati






Editor’s Note

It is indeed an honour to be associated with Vivek, an intellectuallystimulating journal, whose enlightened readership is continually on therise. It was very kind of Ambassador P P Shukla to have introduced mein such glowing terms (in the last issue) to the distinguished readers. Isincerely hope and pray that I live upto the expectations raised by him.

In the days to come, among other things, we are planning variety incontent and contributors besides enhanced readership. We look forwardto your valuable inputs and guidance in this regard.

The month of May has been extraordinarily active. We have had several

summit level meetings between the Indian leadership and theircounterparts from China, Japan, Afghanistan, Thailand et al. We alsowitnessed the gruesome Maoist attack in Chhatisgarh, which raisedseveral questions pertaining to internal security.

In this issue, our eminent analysts have attempted to put forward thesignificance and implications of these developments and suggestedshort term and long term measures to deal with some of the majorissues confronting us vis a vis bilateral relations and national security.

We welcome not only feedback from your end but also contributions inthe form of articles, occasional papers and monographs on our differentareas of study. Readers are also requested to circulate further the e-

journal to their friends and well-wishers who are interestedin/concerned about the issues that we highlight in this humble effort.

As Henry Ford once famously said, “Coming together is a beginning;keeping together is progress; working together is success.”

K G Suresh

Back to Contents

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/h/henryford121997.html








Chinese Premier Li’s Visit To India:

Engaging To Contain

- Brig (Retd) Vinod Anand

Strategic Backdrop

hinese Premier LiKequiang’s visit to Indiatook place at a crucial time

when the geopolitics at the

international level are in a state of flux with the US pursuing its pivotto Asia-Pacific strategy besides itsongoing draw down from

Afghanistan. China, as a possibleresponse to the US maneuvers, ismoving to forge new strategicequations and strengthen its oldones. China’s involvement in

territorial disputes with some of its neighbours like Japan, Vietnam and Philippines also notonly restricts its freedom of strategic maneuver but also paintsa negative image of China’speaceful rise theory and motivatesaffected countries to move closer tothe US and the West to balance

China. Therefore, President XiJinping’s first visit abroad toRussia was in this context aimedat stressing the importance of itsrelations with a close ally.

Similarly, Prime Minister Li’s visitto India was with anunderstanding that India was akey power that could tilt theemerging international strategicbalance either way. While Indian

Prime Minister ManmohanSingh’s visit to Beijing was due inthe coming months, yet Li’s visit toIndia prior to that exhibited thelevel of urgency and keenness withwhich the new leadership wishesto engage India and possiblyreduce the trust deficit andaddress mutual differences on a

number of issues of concern toboth. Chinese leadership is alsoconcerned with Indian moves toforge a closer relationship withJapan and therefore the timing of Li’s visit before Singh’s scheduledtrip to Tokyo was also significantin the strategic context.

That Li chose to make India hisfirst visit abroad after assumingoffice has given a positive thrust toSino-Indian relations and alsounderscored the importance of this

C

*Brig (Retd) Vinod Anand, Senior Fellow, VIF

http://www.vifindia.org/author/vinod-anand







relationship in shaping theemerging world order. The Jointstatement issued at the end of thevisit notes that "both countries

view each other as partners formutual benefit and not as rivals orcompetitors."

Issues of Concern: No Easy

Solutions

Evidently, the most importantissue is the settlement of borderdispute where both sides havefailed to find a solution despite 15rounds of talks by SpecialRepresentatives’(SRs). This isfurthercompounded by thefact that theChinese side hasnot communicated

to India their perception on as towhere does the Line of ActualControl (LAC) lie. Despite the socalled ‘candid and frank’ exchangeof views there is a generalimpression that the Indian PrimeMinister was not assertive enoughin communicating New Delhi’sviews on recent incursion by PLA.

Singh’s statement terming it as an‘incident’ in the Western Sectorhas not been well-received in thestrategic community.

As expected, the Chinese proposalfor formulating a new mechanismin the shape of a BorderCooperation Agreement/Border

Defence Management Agreementhas not been agreed to by India, asaccording to New Delhi, the‘existing mechanisms have provedtheir worth’ in the recent borderstand-off. Not only India had putforward its own proposals to dealwith border flare-ups India alsosought more time to examine

Beijing’s proposal. Further,suggestions for demilitarization of border areas are fraught with risk

so far as India isconcerned becauseof lack of development of

strategicinfrastructure on

the Indian side.However, what has been stressedby India is that an early boundarysettlement is a necessary pre-condition for stabilizing therelationship between the twonations. Though these issues havebeen left for the next round of SRtalks, yet the dissonance in Sino-Indian relations is likely to persistunless this fundamentaldivergence is addressed in asubstantive manner.

Another issue flagged by Indianleadership was the construction of

Evidently, the most importantissue is the settlement of borderdispute where both sides havefailed to find a solution despite15 rounds of talks by SpecialRepresentatives’ (SRs).




dams on YarlungTsangpo/Brahmaputra Riverwithout taking into account theinterest of lower riparian

countries. India proposed a jointmechanism for the same but thisdid not find any positive responsefrom the Chinese side. China wasonly ready to share somehydrological data of river flowswhich might cause floods on theIndian side. In fact, India’sdemand was that the mandate of

existing Expert Level Mechanismshould be expanded to includeinformation sharing on upstreamdevelopmentprojects on theserivers. Li alsospoke reassuringlyof China's respectfor the rights of the

lower riparian states. This hasbeen interpreted by Indianofficials as a “movement forward”but it is not clear up to whatdegree. Generally, China has beenknown for disregarding the rightsof downstream countries over therivers flowing down from Chineseterritory which is contrary tointernational conventions on riverwater flows.

The third important issue fromIndian perspective was a largenumber of Chinese (possibly PAPor some other militia personnel)

working on projects in PakistanOccupied Kashmir (POK) which isrecognized by even China as adisputed area. Though this point

was not brought up by Indiaduring the deliberations with Li, itremains an area of concern forNew Delhi. Conclusion of anagreement with Pakistan onconstructing an economic corridorthrough POK with constructionprojects in admittedly disputedterritory indicates double

standards being followed byChina. It needs to be rememberedthat China had prevented the

Asian DevelopmentBank fromadvancing fundsfor projects in

ArunachalPradesh.

Trade Imbalance and connected

issues: Some Promises

Imbalance in trade was anotherarea which was sought to beaddressed by both sides though;largely the Chinese delegationconsisted mostly of exportrepresentatives rather than

importers. A number of proposalswere made, and these includedgreater Indian access to theChinese market, investment ineach country by the other, andexploring ways to allow Indian

It needs to be remembered thatChina had prevented the AsianDevelopment Bank fromadvancing funds for projects in

Arunachal Pradesh.




manufactures to export theirproducts to China. Beijing alsooffered to invest in and buildinfrastructure in this country.

India’s infrastructurerequirements are huge but thereare also some concerns aboutChinese ways of working andinvesting in such projects whichmay be disadvantageous to Indianfirms.

The Chinese Premier did promiseto help the IT, pharma and otherIndian companies to promote theirbusinesses in China. Apparently,this may not help much as thetrade deficit with China is verylarge and India would have tothink of innovative ways to reducethe imbalance. India was also notkeen to enter into a bilateralRegional Trade Agreement as alsoa Regional ComprehensiveEconomic Partnership (RCEP)which would have further skewedthe trade balance in favour of China.

It was also the first time that amention of promoting theKunming Initiative or BCIM

(Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar) Forum for RegionalCooperation for improvingconnectivity and trade relationsthrough multimodal corridors from

Yunnan- Myanmar and India’s

North East was made at thehighest level.

Earlier, India viewed it as only a

provincial initiative by Yunnan; ithad also not gained much tractiondue to reservations by India ongrounds of security and connectedissues. Hopefully, some substancewould be added to it in the comingyears. So far only conferences of the forum have been held andsome publicity to the BCIMconcept has been given throughKolkata to Kunming car rally.Surprisingly, there were nomembers from Yunnan in China’sbusiness delegation. However,overall on the question of addressing trade imbalance andallied issues Li exhibitedreceptivity and reasonableness.

Apparently, the Joint Statementalso reflected that China and Indiawere ready to discuss bilateralcooperation in civil nuclear fieldfor the first time. India is lookingforward to China removing itsopposition to India becoming amember of the NSG (NuclearSuppliers Group). India is also

keen that China should notprovide its technology etc. toPakistan for Chashma III and IVnuclear plants. The JointStatement maintains that “the twosides will carry out bilateral




cooperation in civil nuclear energyin line with their respectiveinternational commitments.”However, it is envisaged that

China would continue to cooperatewith Pakistan undergrandfathering clause which,perhaps, could be termed by Chinaas part of its ‘internationalcommitments’.

A total of eight agreements weresigned between India and China inareas of military-to-militarycooperation toinclude exercisesbetween respective

Armies, Air Forcesand Navies;cooperation in non-traditional areas of security, relaxingof visas forenhancing peopleto people relationsetc. These were largely areas of congruence except that in militaryexercises, the scope and scale isvery limited.

Regional and Global issues

For sometime, both India andChina were interacting with eachother at Track II and even Track Ilevels on the question of evolvingscenario in Afghanistan post 2014where both countries are

concerned about security andstability. India and China haveinvested huge capital in

Afghanistan and are also

apprehensive about the adversefallout of instability in Afghanistan on the region. Bothhave endorsed an “Afghan-led,

Afghan-owned” reconciliationprocess. India believes that apositive Chinese involvement in

Afghanistan may have the effect of moderating Pakistan’s stance on

the issue. Though, so far Chinahas largely viewedthe Afghanistanissue throughPakistani prism.

There has alsobeen generalconvergence onmost of the globalissues where bothIndia and China

have largely cooperated on climateand trade issues i.e. in DohaDevelopment Round of WTO andDurban climate change summitand WTO issues. Further, for longboth sides have been supportingthe central role of the UN in theinternational affairs which the UShas been disregarding for manyyears.

A mention of Asia Pacific securitywas also made where both sides

A total of eight agreementswere signed between India andChina in areas of military-to-military cooperation to includeexercises between respective

Armies, Air Forces and Navies;cooperation in non-traditionalareas of security, relaxing of visas for enhancing people to

people relations etc.




observed that principles of international law should befollowed to maintain peace andstability; this was somewhat of an

indirect and mild criticism of America’s Asian pivot strategy. Another clause in the jointstatement states that both sides“take a positive view of eachother’s participation in regionaland sub-regional cooperationprocesses, and support each otherin enhancing friendly relations

with their common neighbors formutual benefit, andwin-win results.”From Chineseperspective, itwould mean thatIndia should not beconcerned aboutChina’s

engagement withits South Asianneghbours while India wouldinterpret it as China should,therefore, take similar view of India’s engagement with Vietnam,other ASEAN nations as alsoJapan and other East Asiancountries.

Assessment

It has been said that that talkstook were candid and frankindicating that both sidesarticulated their views freely.

India, in a way, did underline itsunhappiness with lack of progresson the border issue and connectedissues by not restating the

Chinese demand of including theusual averment of Tibet being partof China and ‘One China’ policyetc. However, India did try to playdown the issue as basic policy of India on Tibet has not undergoneany fundamental change. Itappears to be a bargaining tacticfor China’s one-sided policies on

POK. Indian officials feel thatthere is no point inmaking suchremarks/commitments without gettinganything in returnas Kashmir is of core concern toIndia.

Further, China alsowanted to make mention of SouthChina and East China Sea asareas of core concern but was notaccepted to be included in theofficial statement because of thelarger ramifications on thesovereignty and freedom of navigation issues.

Overall, the visit can be describedas moderately successful fromIndian perspective as both sideshave strived to resolve the coredivergences but no easy solution is

Further, China also wanted tomake mention of South Chinaand East China Sea as areas of core concern but was notaccepted to be included in theofficial statement because of the larger ramifications on thesovereignty and freedom of navigation issues.




likely in the short-term. The newChinese leadership has tried toreach out to India without offeringany strategic concessions while

giving minor concessions andmaking some promises. Positivedevelopment could possibly be thatthe Chinese Premier visited Indiafirst thereby indicating the newleadership’s priority. Li’s visit toPakistan immediately thereafter

denotes that China is still playingbalance of power games in South

Asia. Convergence on most of theglobal issues will not help much

unless the bilateral divergencesare settled amicably.

Back to Contents




Prime Minister Singh’s Visit And India-

Japan Relations

- Prof. G V C Naidu

rime Minister ManmohanSingh’s recent visit to Japancould not have come at a

more appropriate time. Though itwas scheduled to take place lastDecember, the summit had to bepostponed due to sudden

announcement of elections to theJapanese Parliament. Thus, theIndian Prime Minister got anopportunity to talk to his newlyelected counterpart, Shinzo Abe,who was the chief architect of India-Japan relations when hewas Prime Minister for about ayear in 2006-07.

Undoubtedly, the credit goes tothe Japanese leader forconceptualising the idea of ‘Indo-Pacific’ that has become amongboth policymakers and analyststhe new geostrategic template todenote growing interface betweenthe Indian and Pacific Oceans and,

importantly, the rising stature of India as a great power of consequence.In his highly appreciated addressto the joint session of the Indian

Parliament during his last Indiavisit, Abe had talked eloquently of the emergence of ‘confluence of two seas’ and the need for Indiaand Japan to join hands to addressa number of issues at the global,East Asian regional and bilateral

level.

In an article to the ProjectSyndicate soon after his electionas Prime Minister, Abepassionately advocated the needfor open and democratic countriesto forge close links. In that shortarticle, he devoted more space to

India than any other country. Hewrote, “I envisage a strategywhereby Australia, India, Japan,and the US state of Hawaii form adiamond to safeguard themaritime commons stretchingfrom the Indian Ocean region tothe western Pacific. I am preparedto invest, to the greatest possible

extent, Japan’s capabilities in thissecurity diamond.” Further, hestated, “Of the two countries,India – a resident power in East

Asia, with the Andaman and

P

* Prof. G V C Naidu








Nicobar Islands sitting at thewestern end of the Strait of Malacca (through which some 40%of world trade passes) – deserves

greater emphasis. Japan is nowengaged in regular bilateralservice-to-service militarydialogues with India, and hasembarked on official trilateraltalks that include the US. AndIndia’s government has shown itspolitical savvy by forging anagreement to provide Japan with

rare earth minerals – a vitalcomponent in manymanufacturingprocesses – afterChina chose to useits supplies of rareearths as adiplomatic stick.”

The visit gainsconsiderablesignificancebecause of the backdrop in whichit took place: the recent standoff with China over its incursionsacross the line of control inLadakh, Beijing’s growingstridence on its claims over theSenkaku islets in East China Seacurrently under Japanese controland its inflexibility and use of force over sovereignty of islands inthe South China Sea. The visitprovided an appropriate strategicsetting for India and Japan to

chart a new course in theirrelationship, which appeared to belosing steam not because theJapanese had lost interest in India

but because of India’s ownindecision and a lack of robustresponse. China is the elephant inthe room and invariably wouldfigure in the discussions, but thereis a host of other issues of commoninterest and concern that deservea lot more attention.

Fortunately for India, the driftthat Japan haswitnessed in itsdomestic politics inthe last few yearswith six primeministers in fiveyears appears to beover with Shinzo

Abe successfullystaging an

unprecedentedcome back at the helm of affairswith a clear mandate. Unlike inhis previous stint, Abe is far moreresolute and confident and iswilling to take bold steps on botheconomic and diplomatic fronts.He has unleashed his own brandof an economic revival programme,some call it Abenomics, which isrisky but seems to be working.

And this should be good news forIndia. There are three specificareas that figured prominently one

The visit provided anappropriate strategic settingfor India and Japan to chart anew course in theirrelationship, which appeared tobe losing steam not because theJapanese had lost interest inIndia but because of India’sown indecision and a lack of

robust response.




way or another during the Singh’sinteractions with his counterpart.

Firstly, India has been the largest

recipient of Japanese aid for thelast several years but in terms of investments, though steadilygrowing, they have not come up toexpectations. Compared to morethan US$ 100 bn. that Japan hasinvested in China, it is hardly 14bn. in India till 2012, whichconstituted less than 4 percent of Japan’s total outboundinvestments. The fruits of theComprehensive EconomicPartnership Agreement (CEPA)between India and Japan thatbecame operational in August2011 are yet to be seen. Thebilateral trade at $18 bn. last yearwas about 1/20th of Japan’s tradewith China.

To be sure, it is not that Japaneseare not interested but it is a factthat India is a far more difficultplace to do business with woefullypoor infrastructure, an enduringlicence Raj system and otherassociated evils such as red tapeand corruption. The much touted

mega project, Delhi MumbaiIndustrial Corridor, signed in 2006is yet to take off and similarly theprogress on dedicated rail freightcorridors that Japan hascommitted to fund connecting

Delhi with Mumbai and Kolkata isexcruciatingly tardy. Morefundamentally, India is still anoutlier when it comes to extensive

East Asian production networkswhere Japanese are deeplyinvolved and unless it integrateswith that region, India will remainunattractive to Japaneseinvestors. Hence, there is anurgent need to strengthen thisweak link in order to make thestrategic partnership truly

comprehensive.Secondly, a quick agreement oncivilian nuclear cooperation (talksstalled consequent to the March2011 Fukushima accident) iscritical for two reasons. First andforemost, Japan has the mostadvanced technology in this sectorand the other, except Russian,most major global reactor buildingcompanies have close links withJapanese companies: Toshibaowns American Westinghouse,Hitachi and Mitsubishi have closetechnical tie ups with GeneralElectric (U.S.) and Areva (French)respectively. Further, Toshibaalone has more than 30 percent of global reactor building capacity.Hence, India cannot hope to forgeany meaningful cooperation in thisdirection without an agreementwith Japan.




Despite continued scepticism andcomplete closure of all nuclearreactors in Japan, Abe has beenactively promoting Japanese

reactors. Besides Vietnam, herecently signed agreements withUnited Arab Emirates andTurkey. India is a huge marketJapan cannot afford to miss, lestRussians and even South Koreansmay corner it. Yet, a deal is noteasy to arrive at in the presentenvironment in Japan although

the two Prime Ministers haveagreed to expedite thenegotiations. Some progress can beexpected after thecrucial elections tothe JapaneseUpper House inJuly.

Thirdly, with an eye on China,intensified security cooperation isanother key area that has figuredquite prominently in thediscussions. Effectively the India-Japan ‘strategic partnership’began to take off only in 2009,though the progress since then hasbeen stupendous. There arecurrently some eight bilateralinstitutional mechanismsincluding annual PrimeMinisterial meetings, Two-Plus-Two Talks, and military-to-military talks. The low key coastguard exercises have been

upgraded to the navy-level in viewof the rapidly changing maritimesecurity environment in the Indo-Pacific region where both have

high stakes, which now isbecoming the global centre of gravity. There are a number of opportunities for them to worktogether in addressinginnumerable non-traditionalsecurity challenges as also inMyanmar and other countries of Southeast Asia.

What is noteworthy is that NewDelhi could not have asked for a

more favourableline up of topJapanese politicalleadership: PrimeMinister Abe,Deputy Prime

Minister Taro Aso, SecretaryGeneral of the ruling LiberalDemocratic Party, Shigeru Ishiba,and several other cabinetministers are known Indophiles.Time is most opportune to takefull advantage of this.

While it is true that for more thantwo decades the Japanese economy

has been mired in virtualstagnation buffeted by deflationand mounting debt, it would befoolhardy to undermine itsstrengths: Japan is sitting on amountain of more than $18 trillion

Thirdly, with an eye on China,intensified security cooperationis another key area that hasfigured quite prominently in thediscussions.




of private savings, is a majorsupplier of investible capital and itcontinues to a leader in severaladvanced technologies. Tokyo has

also been loosening its self-imposed restrictions on export of arms and dual-use technologies. Itmeans a huge opportunity forIndia to work with Japan incertain niche areas. The bottomline is that Japan has been

instrumental in transforming East Asia with its generousinvestments and technologytransfer and the same thing can

happen with India too providedIndia gets its act together andplays its cards well.

Back to Contents




The Pakistan Factor In India’s

Afghanistan Policy

- Monish Gulati

uring his last week’s visitto New Delhi, AfghanPresident Hamid Karzai

sought a pro ‘active’ Indianinvolvement in Afghanistan’ssecurity even as across the border,Chinese Premier Li Kequiang

committed to improve theconnectivity of the strategicallylocated Gwadar port to realize thePakistani dream of turning it intoa regional trade hub for China,

Afghanistan and the Central Asian Republics (CARs).

Also the first US convoy of 50

trucks and armoured vehiclesreached Quetta from Kandahar on21 May, carrying US equipmentbeing withdrawn from

Afghanistan through the Chamancrossing on the Pak-Afghan borderto Port Qasim, Karachi. This cameeven as Pentagon put in a requestfor ‘reprogramming’ its budget for

2013 on account of additionalexpenditure of $ 1.8 billion it hadincurred when Pakistan hadclosed NATO supply routes to

Afghanistan from Karachi last

year.

Contrasting events over the lastweek point to how Pakistan’sforeign policy trumps India’sforeign relations in the sub-continent. It also indicates how

Pakistan with an economypropped up by aid handouts findsitself on the same table as US andChina without declaring itself aregional superpower. India on theother hand appears to beblundering through its foreignpolicy options or operating with itshands tied. The question to be

asked is whether India lacks thecapability to articulate and realizeits interests in Afghanistan or itsforeign policy manoeuvers havebeen constrained by certain ‘redlines’ Pakistan has managed toframe through a dexterousmanipulation of internationalinterests and concerns.

Afghan-Pak Relationship

Despite a common and porousborder, ethnic bonds and shared

D

* Monish Gulati








Pashtun culture, Pakistan’srelations with Afghanistan have atbest, been tenuous. After thedismal outcome of the recent

Afghan-Pak-UK trilateral and thefailure of Hagel and Kerry toachieve a significant breakthroughin Af-Pak, it is becomingincreasingly difficult to predictwhat direction the relationsbetween the two countries willtake after the ongoing securitytransition in Afghanistan. Quite

simply, as one analyst put it,"There are way too many things inplay.” The failureof the two countriesto come to anunderstanding ontheir relationshiphas bred anatmosphere of

suspicion andfrustration making third partyintervention on behest of eitherside very difficult.

Other than the China and Iran,the two neighbours Pakistanshares with Afghanistan,Pakistan’s relations with US andIndia have been playing a crucialrole in shaping its strategy in

Afghanistan. Besides thePakistani fears of encirclement byIndia and the perceived Indianinterference in its internalsecurity affairs particularly in

Baluchistan, it is the blatantPakistani demand at virtually allrecent bilateral and multilateralforums that Afghanistan has no

meaningful relationship withIndia and it has proved to be amajor obstacle in ties between thetwo South Asian countries. Thisinsistence has been shrill of lateon Indo-Afghan bilateral securitycooperation, which is largelyconfined to training of personnelas against any Indian military

presence on Afghan soil. What isworse is the tacit support suchdemands havereceived fromcountries such asthe UK.

However, it is thechoppy dynamics of its relations with

the US that has had overbearinginfluence on Pakistan’s strategicoutlook and external policy. Post2001, US has displaced India asPakistan’s prime foreign policyconcern which in turn stronglyinfluences the country’s dealingswith Afghanistan because itregards the US as one of the majorcauses of instability in

Afghanistan and indeed, withinPakistan itself.

Like all regional stakeholders,Pakistan has also hedged its

The failure of the two countriesto come to an understanding ontheir relationship has bred anatmosphere of suspicion andfrustration making third partyintervention on behest of eitherside very difficult.




interests in Afghanistan, whichunfortunately is premised on theoutcome that in the end, US willnot have its way in Afghanistan. It

is this factor that makesPakistan’s hedging strategydistinct from that of other regionalactors, who too are safeguardingtheir interests, but against theuncertainty of the final outcome in

Afghanistan. Therefore, Pakistanwill oppose directly or indirectlyany move to prolong US presence

across the border. Many analystsinfer that it is this position whichinduces duplicity in Pakistan‘sapproach towards US/NATO in

Afghanistan.

Contrary to what many in Indiawould like to believe, it is verylikely that the withdrawal of UStroops from Afghanistan and theconsequent reduction of USinfluence in the region will takeaway even the economiccooperation plank from the Indo-

Afghan relationship . Pakistan, onthe other hand, has doubly hedgedits bets against Indian role in

Afghanistan by reinforcing theperception that its support for the

Afghan Taliban is a reaction toIndian assertiveness in

Afghanistan. This ensures thatany Pakistani assistance infurthering Afghan reconciliationthat involves Taliban’s cooperation

comes with the underlyingprecondition of keep India out of the picture. A condition thatremains valid even after the US

drawdown and as long as Talibanremains a force to reckon with in Afghanistan. It also gives credenceto this ungainly argument that apart of Afghanistan’s woes are dueto India’s ‘hegemonistic’aspirations in the region.

Thus, India finds itself in aposition where Pakistan’s supportto the insurgency in Kashmir isbeing viewed as legitimateassistance to a local independencestruggle while any notion thatIndia might harbor for a tit-for-tatin Baluchistan will be construedas interference in Pakistan’sinternal affairs and in the eyes of the international community an‘irresponsible’ act to destabilizethe fragile situation in

Afghanistan and regional peace.International sentiments remainequally ‘understanding’ of Pakistani fears on ‘encirclement’by India, while it is India that isfinding itself increasingly isolatedby China in its own backyard.

In addition to managing its affairswith the US, Pakistan appears toutilise its ‘all-weather’relationship with China as acounterbalance to both the US and




India and at the same timepartake economic benefits throughdevelopment of bilateral trade . Italso looks to increased transit

revenue on account of trade trafficthrough its transportation routesand ports as a spin off from theChinese economic activity in

Afghanistan. The recent handoverof commercial operations of Gwadar port to the Chinese is anindicator of this approachPakistan is also trying to manage

its disagreements with Iran overthe strategic approach to Afghanistan andCentral Asia. Thiswould providePakistan access toIran’s energyresources, preventdiversion of

potential transittrade revenue from Gwadar andsimultaneously deny India accessto the CARs. The recent IranPakistan gas pipeline deal withIran showcases this approachwhich Pakistan formalized againstUS opposition and the seeminglyirreconcilable Sunni-Shiasectarian divide.

Internally the situation inPakistan is equally confounding asthe country which continues toface major concerns on economicstability, growth and security,

professes lack of state control overmilitants on its territory and whatit has got many to believe- itsnuclear arsenal. Pakistani non-

state actors who appear to bebeyond Pakistani control (in theprocess absolve it of anyresponsibility for their actions)strangely, at times, find commonground with the Pakistani state inpursuit of their ‘criminal’objectives. The recent decision of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP)

to participate in Afghan Taliban'sspring offensive in Afghanistanagainst Afghan andforeign forces is onesuch case. TTP alsoconfirmed that itscadres werealready activeagainst Afghan and

foreign forces,especially in the Logar province.

Red Lines

Through a deft management of international opinion and a subtleexploitation of their vulnerabilitiesand fears, Pakistan has manageddraw certain ‘red lines’ for Indian

foreign policy on Afghanistan. Thefirst line ensures India deals withPakistani support to foreignmilitants in Kashmir on its side of line of control only, as an internalsecurity issue. Second, any

The recent decision of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) toparticipate in Afghan Taliban'sspring offensive in Afghanistanagainst Afghan and foreignforces is one such case.




support to militancy inBaluchistan, even financially, isan irresponsible act of interferingin the internal affairs of an

economically and politically fragilenuclear weapon state. Third linerestricts support to Afghanistan tonon-military /security areas andno measure is taken to upstagePakistan’s influence and leveragewith the government of the day in

Afghanistan. That comes withminor discomfort of issues such as

no Most Favoured Nation status,no transit for Indian trade, TAPI(Turkmenistan, Afghanistan,Pakistan and India) gas lineremains a pipe dream etc.

Conclusion

It is imperative for India,therefore, for to find its way out of

the ‘foreign policy confines’Pakistan has created for it withregards to its relations with

Afghanistan. There is a need toreplace the theory of Indian‘irresponsibility’ in seeking agreater role in future of

Afghanistan with Pakistani‘responsibility’ to acknowledge thefact that that as an independentsovereign nation, Afghanistan hasthe right to manage its ownrelations with its neighboursdriven by the interest of its ownpeople.

Back to Contents




The Art Of A Bloodless War

- Kanwal Sibal

his is the lesson fromLadakh — when cracks arepapered over, they reappear

several conclusions can be drawnfrom The India-China Stand-off inLadakh. One, China can create anincident on the unsettled border ata time and place of its choosing,

irrespective of positivedevelopments in other aspects of the bilateral relationship. Weshould not believe that expandedpolitical and trade ties willdissuade China from asserting itsunreasonable territorial claims. Ittreats territorial issues as a coreinterest, separating them from

even massive advantages it canobtain from a bilateralrelationship, as in the case of China-Japan ties.

Two, we have no effective politicalanswer to such provocations. Inwhat can be termed as politicalwhimpering , we downplayed theChinese action, characterising itas acne on an otherwise beautifulface, advising against losing sleepover it, calling it localised andeven an occurrence in no man’s

land.

We seemed reluctant to point apolitical finger at the Chineseleadership for the provocation.Our extraordinarily re- strainedreaction showed greater concernthan that of China itself about not

disturbing the dynamic of ourimproving relationship. Risk-averse and believing that welacked good options, we calculatedthat a conciliatory posture andstress on dialogue offered the leastdamaging way out of the crisis.

We wanted the forthcoming visitsof Foreign minister SalmanKhurshid to China and that of Chinese premier Li Keqiang toIndia to proceed as planned, as if we had more stakes than Chinahad in their success. Such high-level visits are intended to bolsterties, not to paper over militarilyprovocative acts to the advantageof the stronger country. Bytreating the Chinese incursion asincidental, with little politicalimport, capable of being resolvedat the local level and preferring,

T

* Kanwal Sibal, Dean, Centre for International Relations and Diplomacy, VIF

http://www.vifindia.org/author/shri-kanwal-sibal

http://www.vifindia.org/author/shri-kanwal-sibal




meanwhile, business as usual tocontinue with China, we gave thelatter considerable room to defusethe issue as opportune.

Three, we lack confidence in amilitary option. Our armed forcesbelieve that they could have forcedthe Chinese intruders to withdrawwithout a fight, but our politicalleadership is excessively cautious.

Apparently, it took the CabinetCommittee on Security 17 days toseek a briefing directly from ourarmy chief, indicating that wepreferred dealingwith the PLAintrusion as adiplomatic issue,not a military one.

It can be safelyassumed that the

Chinese, adamantabout not withdrawing despiteseveral flag meetings anddiplomatic demarches, would nothave agreed to restore the statusquo ante without some Indianconcession. To force India to ceaseits defensive activity in other partsof Ladakh, China ignored the

existing border mechanisms toresolve differences and relied onan act of force in the Depsang

Valley. We have been cautionedabout what to expect if we persistin objectionable activities in areas

where actual control is disputed intheir reckoning. Our failure torespond militarily will cost us inthe future. It would be naive to

believe that Khurshid’s toughenedtone in describing the Chineseresponse to our demarches as“unsatisfactory” and PMManmohan Singh’s decision toextend his stay in Japan by a daypersuaded the Chinese to end thestand-off. They might havedecided that their limited objective

had been served.Four, the incursionclearly caught usunawares as wehad begun tobelieve that China,pre-occupied withtensions with its

easternneighbours, was

genuinely reaching out to us, andthat by imaginatively using thisopportunity we could lay thefoundation of a new bilateralrelationship. While it is true that astable relationship with Chinaserves our foreign policy interestswell, it cannot be a one-sidedaffair. Underneath the rhetoric of wanting improved ties with India,China is steadily undermining ourinterests in our neighbourhood bywanting equal treatment withIndia in Nepal, courting the Sri

Three, we lack confidence in amilitary option. Our armedforces believe that they couldhave forced the Chineseintruders to withdraw withouta fight, but our politicalleadership is excessivelycautious.




Lankan government witheconomic and military aid, wooingthe maldives government,strengthening ties with

Bangladesh and continuing tostrategically instrumentalisepakistan with nuclear cooperationand the takeover of Gwadar port.

Our unduly positive projections atthe official level of our developing

ties with China are in conflict withreality. When cracks are paperedover, they reappear — that is thelesson to be drawn from the recent

drama in Ladakh.

Back to Contents




Sarabjit Singh: Execution By Murder

- Sushant Sareen

n the end, Sarabjit Singh wasexecuted not by a hangman butby Pakistan’s famed ‘non-state’

actors – his fellow prisoners on deathrow – who are believed to have beenput up to the job of bludgeoning himinto a lifeless pulp by ‘state’ actors(jail officials). Of course, instead of someone pulling the hangman’s

lever, in Sarabjit’s case it was theproverbial plug being pulled on thelife support machines by ‘state’doctors. Regardless of what spin isput on his death by the Pakistaniauthorities, it is quite clear that itwas a political decision taken bythem to put a closure to the entiredrama surrounding Sarabjit.

The entire Sarabjit saga is a tale of clinical solutions being used byPakistani authorities against him:his arrest – he was a convenientscapegoat for the Pakistani securityforces who needed someone to blamefor a series of bomb blasts; hisconviction – all evidence proving thathe was not the person responsiblewas disregarded, and fake and

tutored witnesses were produced(some of whom later retracted theirtestimony) to procure a guilty verdictand have him sentenced him todeath; his murder – get already

condemned prisoners to beat him todeath (their punishment can’t getany worse but they will be able toearn ‘sawab’ or rewards in the after-life for having killed a despicableinfidel) and pre-empt any possiblereprieve or release for him, inaddition to getting even with the‘hated Hindus’ for executing two

soldiers of Islam (Ajmal Kasab and Afzal Guru) and sending a strongsignal to Infidel India; and finally hisexecution – carried out by doctorswho switched off his life supportsystems because it was too expensivefor to keep him alive indefinitely andit was not politically possible to sendhim to India.

Even after Sarabjit was reduced intoa vegetable as a result of the brutalbeating he was subjected to, thePakistani bloodlust wasn’t satisfied.It was almost as though the onlything that would satisfy thetalibanised Pakistani mindset wasstringing Sarabjit’s comatose body onthe gallows! Having committed theterrible wrong of outsourcing his

execution to ‘non-state’ actors, thePakistanis could still have done theright thing by sending a lifeless butstill alive Sarabjit back to his countryand his family. For anyone to argue

I

*Sushant Sareen, Senior Fellow, VIF

http://www.vifindia.org/author/sushant-sareen

http://www.vifindia.org/author/sushant-sareen




that the interim government inPakistan was not empowered to takea decision on releasing even acomatose Sarabjit is completenonsense. If it wanted, the caretakergovernment was fully competent tohave advised the President to granthim clemency him and repatriatehim to India on humanitariangrounds. That it chose not to,suggests that it is either scared of aright-wing reaction or else subscribeto the extremist mindset.

Having blown this opportunity, thePakistanis should be prepared for ablowback of hostility, if not from aneffete Indiangovernment then atleast from anincensed publicopinion in India. Themurder of Sarabjitwill certainly add

bitterness inrelations and serve as a setback toefforts to promote people-to-peopleties between the two countries.Perhaps, this is exactly what thosewho conspired to murder Sarabjitwere aiming for. But to say thatIndian people should not play intothe hands of enemies of peace bygiving in to their emotions over the

brutal killing of Sarabjit is to missthe point.

If indeed peace is such a desirableobjective and is in the interest of

peoples of both countries, then is theonus for peace only on India? Doesn’tPakistan also have a responsibility torein in these enemies of peace? Didn’tPakistan understand the sensitivitiesattached to Sarabjit’s case and howany untoward incident couldembitter an already tenuous state of relations? And if it did, why didn’tthey take precautions of the typeIndia took with Ajmal Kasab tosafeguard Sarabjit from any assault?Or is it that they didn’t care a whitfor the sentiments and emotions of

Indians? If so, then what is thispeople-to-people relation that isbeing promoted andincessantly parrotedby apologists forPakistan? Isn’t ittherefore time thatwe re-evaluate thestate of relations andre-examine the

assumptions that areguiding India’s policy on Pakistan?Of course, if we want to proveEinstein’s definition of insanity – doing the same thing over and overagain and expecting a different resulteach time – correct, then we are onthe right track. Otherwise, thereneeds to be a new approach adoptedtowards Pakistan, one that sheds the

shibboleths of the past.

Back to Contents

Having blown this opportunity,the Pakistanis should beprepared for a blowback of hostility, if not from an effeteIndian government then atleast from an incensed publicopinion in India.




Reforming The Indian Police

- Dr M N Buch

n the case relating toirregularities or evencriminality in the allocation of

coal blocks, where investigationwas handed over to the CBI, theSupreme Court has taken strongobjection to governmentintervention in proceedingspending before the agency and the

Hon’ble Judges have remarkedthat they will not rest till CBIbecomes independent of government control. This has onceagain led to clamour for policereforms.

Let us go to the Act which createdthe Indian Police, the Indian

Police Act of 1861. The Preambleof the Police Act reads, “Whereasit is expedient to reorganise thepolice and to make it a moreefficient instrument for theprevention and detection of crime…” Let us compare this with theDelhi Police Act 1978, whichfollowed 117 years later. The

Preamble to this Act reads, “An Act to amend and consolidate thelaws relating to the regulation of the police in the Union Territory of Delhi”. This Act does not in any

way detract from the objective of the 1861 Act which was to makethe police a more efficientinstrument for the prevention anddetection of crime. In other words,the primary function of the policeis to prevent and detect crime andit is for this purpose that we haveorganised a police force. Section 23

of the Police Act of 1861 reads asunder:- “It shall be the duty of every police officer promptly toobey and execute all orders andwarrants lawfully issued to him byany competent authority; to collectand communicate intelligenceaffecting public peace; to preventthe commission of offences and

public nuisances; to detect andbring offenders to justice; and toapprehend the persons whom he islegally authorised to apprehendand for whose apprehensionsufficient ground exists…” Whenwe look at the Delhi Police Act of 1978 we find that under sections59 and 60 the provisions of section

23 of the Police Act of 1861 havebeen elaborated but in essence theduties of the police remain as wasprescribed in 1861. Even in theModel Police Bill prepared by the

I

*Dr M N Buch, Dean, Centre for Governance and Political Studies, VIF

http://www.vifindia.org/author-dr-mahesh-n-buch

http://www.vifindia.org/author-dr-mahesh-n-buch




Soli Sorabji Committee thisposition has not substantiallychanged. The duty of the police isto prevent offences from taking

place, investigate crimes whenthey occur and apprehendcriminals. This is fundamental toevery police force in the world.

The Police Act notwithstanding,the principal powers and functionsof the police are given in the Codeof Criminal Procedure. Forexample, the power to arrestpersons is given in chapter VCr.P.C. and in effecting an arrestthe police officer isbound by theprovisions of law.He has no arbitrarypowers, nor can anunauthorisedperson direct or pressurise a policeofficer to arrest any person orpersons. In fact section 60ACr.P.C. is very specific in thisbehalf and it reads, “Arrest to bemade strictly according to theCode: No arrest shall be madeexcept in accordance with theprovisions of this Code or anyother law for the time being inforce providing for arrest”. A Magistrate, a Judge, a superiorpolice officer who is directlyconnected with the case in handmay order the arrest of a personbut certainly no minister, no

politician, no other officer can givesuch an order to the police. If suchan order is given the police mustignore it.

Chapter X Cr.P.C. gives theExecutive Magistracy and thepolice the additional duty of maintaining public order andtranquility. In other words, thepolice is responsible for ensuringthat law and order is maintained.For this purpose it is empoweredto use force, including lethal force,to disperse an unlawful assembly,to prevent riots and to ensure that

there is peace andtranquility.

Chapter XIreminds the policethat it is its duty tointerpose for the

purpose of preventing thecommission of any cognisableoffence. Preventive action,therefore, is not only permissible,it is enjoined and failure to takepreventive action could be treatedas dereliction of duty. A policeofficer may arrest without awarrant a person designing tocommit a cognisable offence and tointervene to prevent injury topublic property. Once again thepolice is required to follow the lawand intervene whenever there isadequate information to suggestthat a cognisable offence may be

The Police Act notwithstanding,the principal powers andfunctions of the police are givenin the Code of CriminalProcedure.




committed. In this behalf thepolice is not subordinate to anyoneand must act according to law.

Chapter XII Cr.P.C. is one of themost important parts of the Codeof Criminal Procedure because it isunder this chapter that the policeregisters information in relation toa cognisable offence and thenproceeds with its investigation,arrives at a conclusion about theperson or persons against whomthere is sufficient evidence toestablish a prima facie case, ordecides that no case is made outagainst any person and, therefore,the case should be closed with thepermission of a competent court.This is the chapter under whichthe police presents a challanbefore a Magistrate and if theMagistrate takes cognisancethereon, the police thereafterproceeds to help the prosecution inthe trial which would follow.

In the matter of investigation thepolice, which includes the DelhiSpecial Police Establishment inwhose name CBI takes action, istotally immunised from pressure

by anyone. There are only threeauthorities which can askquestions to the police regardingan investigation. The first is thesuperior police officer who, undersection 36 Cr.P.C. by virtue of his

right to exercise the same poweras the officer incharge of the policestation located within his

jurisdiction, can call the station

officer to account. The second is adesignated police officer who is sodirected by the state governmentunder section 158 Cr.P.C to be thechannel through whom a reportunder section 157 is to beforwarded by the station officer toa competent magistrate. Suchsuperior officer may give

instructions to the officer inchargeof the police station as he thinksfit and may record suchinstructions on the report undersection 157 while forwarding it tothe Magistrate. The limitationhere is that no officer who iscompetent to give directions to thestation officer may order him to

function in contravention of law,add to the charge-sheet names of the persons against whom noprima facie case is made out ordelete from the list personsagainst whom there is a primafacie case. The instructions haveto be aimed at improving thequality of the investigation andnothing more and nothing less.

A third authority would be theMagistrate before whom the reportis presented. Under section 159Cr.P.C. a Magistrate may directinvestigation, depute a




subordinate magistrate to hold apreliminary enquiry or himself hold such enquiry. Suchintervention is legal and lawful,

but it cannot replace the policeinvestigation, nor can it result inthe police being given instructionswhich are not lawful. When theinvestigation is completed and thepolice officer sends his reportunder section 173 to a Magistrate,either by way of a challan or as afinal report requesting permission

to close the case, such report maybe submitted through a superiorpolice officerdesignated undersection 158 andsuch officer mayeither immediatelyforward the reportto the Magistrate

or order furtherinvestigation. Once, however, thechallan has been presented theresponsibility passes to theJudiciary for further action, exceptto the extent that under section173 Cr.P.C even after the challanis presented the police iscompetent to make supplementaryinvestigation and forward afurther report to the Magistrate.

This elaboration of law becomesnecessary in order to explain thatin the law as it stands today thereis an absolute bar on anyone,

other than a superior police officeror a Magistrate, to intervene inthe investigation of an offence.The Chief Minister, the Minister

in charge of Home, their officers,other politicians, members of themedia, people at large are totallyprecluded from any role in theinvestigation of an offence. Theautonomy of the police in thisbehalf is absolute and it has beenso ever since the Britishestablished the present system of

policing and justice in India. Theamendments to the Code of Criminal

Procedure, various Acts governing thepolice, have notaltered thisposition, that is, inthe investigation

and prosecution of offences the police is totallyindependent of any executive orpolitical authority. This does notmean that if the police needs legaladvice it cannot refer the matter tothe Home Department forobtaining the advice of the LawDepartment, of the AdvocateGeneral or the Attorney General,but this has to be done formally,specific questions have to beforwarded for a clarification oradvice and the legal advice mustbe in writing and in the form of anopinion. It can never take the form

The Chief Minister, theMinister in charge of Home,their officers, other politicians,members of the media, peopleat large are totally precludedfrom any role in theinvestigation of an offence.




of a directive because ultimatelythe decision whether to prosecuteor not and the charges on whichthe prosecution is to be done rests

with the investigating officer. TheLaw Ministry or Law Departmentcannot given any directivewhatsoever to the police in thisbehalf. This becomes all the moreimportant in the light of theDSPE/CBI investigation of thecases relating to coal allocation.The mistake that the DSPE made

was in showing a status reportmeant for submission to theSupreme Court to the Union LawMinister, the Attorney Generaland certain officers representingthe Coal Ministry and the PrimeMinister’s Office. These are allpersons who have no authoritywhatsoever in either suggesting to

the police or directing it to changeany part of the report. This is allthe more so because DSPE had notmade any formal reference forlegal advice and, therefore, all theunauthorised interveners wereacting without jurisdiction. Whosefault is this? Certainly the lawcannot be faulted because somepersons violated the law. It is theDirector of the SDPE/CBI and hisofficers who acted wrongly inanswering a summons by the LawMinister. What they should havedone is to politely but firmly tellhim that they would be unable to

share any information with himregarding a specific case. TheSupreme Court can direct thatofficers shall obey the law, but if

an officer chooses to ignore thisdirection the only remedy is topunish him. Any other action bythe Supreme Court in the face of the existing clear provisions of lawwould be tautological and uncalledfor.

Having established that theexisting law gives the policecomplete freedom in the matter of investigation of offences and forwhich the police must be protectedfrom undue influence or pressure,what are the areas in whichgovernment may and in factshould give directions to the policeand what is the manner of discharging accountability in thematter of the functioning of thepolice? When we talk of policereforms we must take these intoaccount. First and foremost itmust be recognised that the policeis a part of the executivegovernment, created by law and assuch it is both a creature of lawand a servant of society as part of the Executive. To state that theExecutive has no rule to play inthe matter of policing is somethingwhich is totally unacceptable. TheExecutive brings legislation beforethe Legislature to further its own




ability to perform as an effectiveorgan of the State. This authorityof the Executive cannot be diluted.Similarly, it is the Legislature

which legislates, even in mattersrelating to the police and thisauthority also cannot be diluted.The power of superintendence overthe police, including the DelhiSpecial Police Establishment orCBI constituted under any lawcreating it, will have to continue tovest in the Executive, if for no

other reason than the fact thatrules, regulations, etc., framedunder the Police Act, any Police

Act, would comeunder thedefinition of delegatedlegislation andwould form an

extension of thelaw in question. Delegatedlegislation cannot be furtherdelegated to subordinateauthorities and, therefore, theultimate arbiter of what rules andregulations will govern the policehas to be the ExecutiveGovernment.

The police, in addition to thematter of offences also is aguardian of public peace andtranquility. This calls for certainregulatory powers to the policeand executive magistracy,

including regulating thecongregation of people, prescribinginstructions and standing ordersregarding traffic movement,

processions and assemblies, publicmeetings, etc. Standing orders orprocedures of how to deal with alaw and order situation, a mob,and an adamant procession mustcontain the instructions whichgovernment wants the police tofollow. It is legitimate forgovernment to state how force can

be used, the quantum of forcewhich may be used and theattitude of the police towards

different types of assemblies. For

example,government maydesire that a crowdlargely made up of

women andchildren, students, a religiouscongregation, etc., should behandled with great restraint bythe police even faced by theincreasing defiance of orders bythe assembly. It would not bepermitted to use extreme forceagainst persons who areindividually quite helpless.Similarly, an agitation bystudents, workers with a genuinegrievance, people who arehandicapped would have to bedealt with patiently,sympathetically and with great

It is legitimate for governmentto state how force can be used,the quantum of force whichmay be used and the attitude of the police towards differenttypes of assemblies.




restraint and government mustmake this clear to the police. Onthe other hand a violent riot inwhich there is arson, deadly

assault, looting and in particularviolence aimed at a particularcommunity must be dealt withvery firmly, with adequate forcebeing applied at the earliest

juncture to bring the situationunder control. Here the policemust act swiftly and if the use of firearms is called for, the police

must do so, though under strictfire discipline. Here theinstructions of government wouldbe different from those relating toa collection of women andchildren. The power of superintendence covers all this. Itgoes further. If a police officerdisobeys instructions or is derelict

in his duty government should callhim to account immediately andaward suitable punishment. Inthis matter the subordination of the police to government has to becomplete and there is no way inwhich the police can be madeindependent in this behalf. Thisdoes not mean that they will workunder undue constraint, but theywill observe the instructions givenin this behalf by government,follow instructions or pay animmediate price.

It is argued that governmentshould virtually have no power inthe matter of postings andtransfers of police officers. It is

considered that one of the thingswhich sap morale is arbitrarinessin personnel management and,therefore, such arbitrariness mustbe removed. This is a principlewhich applies across the board toall government organisations andshould not be restricted to thepolice only. There must be a

specific policy regarding postingsand transfers, but such a policycannot eliminate governmentaltogether from personnelmanagement of the police. If thereare charges of misconduct againsta police officer, which are raised inthe Legislature, can the Chief Minister or the Home Minister

turn around and state that he hasno authority in this behalf?Legislators can legitimatelydemand that if the law does notauthorise the government to evenlook into police misconduct, excepton the advice of a complaintsauthority which may take its ownsweet time in reaching a decision,then the law should be changedand this would have to be donenotwithstanding any instructionsgiven by any court, including theSupreme Court.




Let us carry the argument further. At present the District Magistrateis an agency not under the policebut with certain powers under the

Police Act. Even the Soli SorabjiCommittee has not recommendeddilution of these powers. However,there is another power that theDM has, which is that people whohave a grievance against the policecan go to him and without in anyway intervening in any matter inwhich the police has exclusive

jurisdiction, he can at least askthe Superintendent of Police aboutthe specific complaint made to himand then take steps to persuadethe police to settle the grievance.This is an immediate remedyavailable to people against policeexcesses and so far it has beenworking fairly well. The

grievances redressal machinerysuggested by Soli SorabjiCommittee and pleaded for beforethe Supreme Court by personswho are fighting a series of writpetitions in the form of PublicInterest Litigation, would beprocedure bound and would not beable to give quick relief to a personwho has a complaint against thepolice. Imagine the fate of a personillegally detained by the police, nothaving the wherewithal toapproach a court of law and beingkept at the tender mercy of thepolice, which has its own agenda.

To whom should such a personturn? By the time the grievanceredressal machinery swings intoaction the man may have already

faced humiliation, illegaldetention, physical violenceamounting to torture and worse.Should there not be someone onthe ground by whom at least hiscomplaint can be looked at and thepolice be made immediatelyaccountable for its actions?

We are not living in Britain orScandinavia. We are living inIndia in which, like other arms of government, the police also can bearbitrary, venal, eitherdeliberately or unknowinglyuninfluenced by law and, perhaps,in some sort of arrangement withthe very criminals it is supposed tosuppress. One wants a civilisedpolice force just as one wants aneducated teacher and an honestrevenue official, a knowledgeableforest official, a transportdepartment which is not steepedin corruption and a municipalitywhich actually serves the people.The police cannot be the onlyorganisation to be subjected toreform, nor can the police be left toits own devices in whichgovernment virtually has no powerto correct wrongdoing and, in thename of autonomy, accountabilityis shown the door. These are all




factors which must be taken intoaccount when we talk of policereforms. It is not an easy task, butthere have to be two different but

parallel approaches to reformingthe police. The first is to remindthe police of its own authorityunder law and then keep a strictvigil to ensure that the policeactually functions according to thelaw. The second, equallyimportant approach is that

whereas arbitrariness by officialsand politicians in dealing with thepolice is eliminated, the system of accountability is tightened and the

police must be forced to renderaccount and tread the right path.That, according to me, is the truereform of the police.

Back to Contents




Lip Service Is Still Being Paid To Defence

Indigenisation

- Brig (Retd) Gurmeet Kanwal

he Defence Minister, Mr AK Antony, has repeatedlyexhorted the armed forces to

procure their weapons andequipment from indigenoussources in recent months. It is awell-established fact that no

nation aspiring to great powerstatus can expect to achieve itwithout being substantively self-reliant in defence production.However, it is not the armed forcesthat are the stumbling block.Unless the government drasticallyreorients its policies, the importcontent of defence acquisitions will

continue to remain over 80 percent.

India’s procurement of weaponsplatforms and other equipment aspart of its plans for defencemodernisation, mustsimultaneously lead to atransformative change in thecountry’s defence technology baseand manufacturing prowess. Orelse, defence procurement willremain mired in disadvantageousbuyer-seller, patron-client

relationships like that with theerstwhile Soviet Union and nowRussia. While we manufacturedRussian fighter aircraft and tanksunder license, the Russians neveractually transferred technology toIndia. Whatever India procures

now must be procured with thetransfer of technology being builtinto the contract even if it meanshaving to pay a higher price. Theaim should be to make India adesign, development,manufacturing and export hub fordefence equipment in two decades.

Though it seeks to encouragepublic-private partnerships, thegovernment continues to retain itsmonopoly on defence productionand R&D. The latest DefenceProcurement Procedure (DPP) wasamended in April 2013 to reflectthe current thinking on ‘buyingIndian’. However, in effect it stillfavours the defence PSUs over theprivate sector. MNCs are allowedto bring in only up to 26 per centFDI as against 74 per cent for non-defence sector joint ventures.

T

* Brig (Retd) Gurmeet Kanwal, Visiting Fellow, VIF

http://www.vifindia.org/author/brig-retd-gurmeet-kanwal







Though the procurement of weapons and equipment worthmore than Rs 300 crore fromMNCs has been linked with 30-50

per cent offsets, it is doubtfulwhether the economy is ready toabsorb such high levels of offsets.

The DRDO is in the process of implementing the report of the PRama Rao committee that hadasked it to identify 8 to 10 criticalareas that best fit its existinghuman resource pool,technologicalthreshold andestablishedcapacity to take upnew projects. Sinceits inception in1958, the DRDOhas achieved somespectacularsuccesses, but alsohas many failures to its name.However, to its credit, it workedunder extremely restrictivetechnology denial regimes andwith a rather low indigenoustechnology base.

The DRDO must now concentrate

its efforts on developing criticalcutting edge technologies that nostrategic partner is likely to bewilling to share; for example,ballistic missile defence (BMD)technology. Other future weapons

platforms should be jointlydeveloped, produced and marketedwith India’s strategic partners inconjunction with the private

sector. The development of technologies that are not criticalshould be outsourced completely tothe private sector. Also, the armedforces should be given fundingsupport to undertake researchgeared towards the improvementof in-service equipment with aview to enhancing operational

performance and increasingservice life.Gradually, theuniversities andthe IITs should beinvolved in

undertakingdefence R&D. This

five-pronged

approach will helpto raise India’stechnological threshold over thenext two decades by an order of magnitude.

The defence production processmust provide a level playing fieldbetween defence PSUs and privateIndian companies forming jointventures with MNCs wherenecessary. The amount of FDI thatMNCs can bring in must be raisedto 49 per cent immediately and to74 per cent in due course to makeit attractive for MNCs. However,

The DRDO is in the process of implementing the report of theP Rama Rao committee thathad asked it to identify 8 to 10critical areas that best fit itsexisting human resource pool,technological threshold andestablished capacity to take upnew projects.




no MNC that is unable to providetransfer of technology – either dueto the home country’s restrictivelaws or due to proprietary

considerations – should beconsidered for future defenceacquisitions.

India cannot leap-frog to a higherdefence technology trajectoryvirtually overnight. Transforminga low technology base to a higherplane will need time, patience andlarge-scale capital investment. Itwill also need strong supportacross the political spectrum. Inthe interim period, there will be afurther dip in defencepreparedness. This short-termweakness in capacity building willneed to be carefully weighedagainst long-term gains that willbe strategic in nature.

The immediate requirement is tothink big in keeping with thecountry’s growing economic cloutand to plan for the future with a

level of confidence that policyplanners have not dared to exhibitbefore. In 10 to 15 years Indiamust begin to acquire most of itsdefence equipment needs fromIndian companies — with orwithout a joint venture with anMNC. Only then will the era of self-reliance in defence acquisition

truly dawn on the country. It willbe a difficult quest, but not onethat a great nation cannot realise.

Back to Contents




Indian Media Must Review Its Priorities

- K G Suresh

n February 2013, one of Delhi’s leading newspaperspublished a news item which

claimed that Indians don’t believein ghosts anymore andsuperstitions have reduced in thecountry. The report was based ona research conducted during theKumbh Mela by scientists fromCouncil of Scientific and IndustrialResearch (CSIR), who claimed tohave spoken to all sections of thesociety.

“In fact, Kumbh was chosen sincenowhere else in the country canone find such variety of people,”said Gauhar Raza, chief scientist

of National Institute of ScientificCommunication and Information

— a part of CSIR — who led theteam.

What is good news for the countryat large must have been bad newsnot only for the Tantriks and blackmagic practitioners from all

communities, who thrive on thesuperstition of the masses but alsomany a television channel, whichover the years has been providinga staple diet of superstition such

as ghosts and revenge of the snakewomen to up their TRPs.

Having exhausted all suchmaterial in Indian folklore, theinnovative producers did nothesitate to predict the world’s endbased on the Mayan calendar or toturn a God Damned Particle intoGod’s Particle. It could not havebeen more outrageous andridiculous.

Not that there is a dearth of newsincluding positive stories in anation of a billion plus, but thenmediocrity has come to rule theroost, hard work has become a

forgotten virtue and trivia the inthing.

It would also be unjust to dismissthese trends as an issue of convenience or lethargy. There arefar deeper designs to it withprofits being the only motive.

As the country’s Vice-PresidentHamid Ansari put across couple of years back, "Indian media is facinga crisis of content. Thephenomenon of convergence

I

*K G Suresh, Senior Fellow, VIF

http://www.vifindia.org/author/k-g-suresh







between news media,entertainment and telecom hasmeant that the demarcationbetween professional journalistic

output, public relations,advertisement and entertainmentis fast blurring”.

Apparently disturbed over thedeteriorating trends in the media,

Ansari was of the view that the"public perception today is thatthe ethical underpinning of professional journalism hasweakened."

However, it is inthe electronicmedia bogged downby TRP ratingsthat crisis of content ismanifested more

prominently, Ansari said while referring toprogrammes devoted to astrology,superstition, crime and sleaze.

Of late, another extremelyworrying trend has been noticed.From the days of yellow

journalism, ‘lifafa journalism’ and

sting for blackmail to ‘Paid News’and Radia Tapes, the disturbingtrend now is even big mediahouses turning extortionist.Sensational cases of corruption areoffered to be suppressed for a

price. There cannot be a moreblacker period for Indian

journalism.

Today, increasingly questions arebeing raised as to why a journalisthas written a particular piece asagainst the earlier curiosity aboutwhat has been written by thescribe.

Referring to the "progressivetransformation" of the Indiancitizen into a significant consumerof media content and products,

Vice-President Ansari had said,today questionswere being raisedwhether journalistsunderstand thosedemarcations andrespect them or are

willing to sacrificethem for commercial gains.

Questions are also being asked inacademic and policy quarterswhether Indian journalism isaping the West blindly and notrealising its role as a catalyst forinclusive development in a

developing country.

Whose priorities are they battingfor? P Sainath of The Hindu hadonce famously said that the Indianfarmer would have loved to beborn as the heavily subsidised

However, it is in the electronicmedia bogged down by TRPratings that crisis of content ismanifested more prominently,

Ansari said while referring toprogrammes devoted toastrology, superstition, crimeand sleaze.




American cow. The recent raceamong English channels in favourof fuel price hike, deregulation,end to subsidies and FDI was

absolutely out of sync with theneeds and aspirations of the Áam Admi’. Comparisons were beingmade to western countries wherespending on social security andfarm subsidies is heavy.

While one may disagree withPress Council Chairman JusticeMarkandey Katju on severalissues, he had a point when heasked, “What do we see ontelevision thesedays? Somechannels show filmstars, pop music,disco and fashionparades (often withscantily clad youngwomen), astrology or cricket. Is itnot a cruel irony and an affront toour poor people that so much timeand money are being spent onshowing cricket, film stars, disco-dancing, and pop music? Whathave the Indian masses to do withcricket, film stars, fashionparades, disco and pop? TheIndian media today are largelyacting irresponsibly and notserving the people in theirstruggle against poverty,unemployment, and other socialevils, as they ought to be doing.

Addressing the Speaker’s LectureSeries in Parliament House inSeptember 2007, Sainath, Rural

Affairs Editor with The Hindu,

sought to put the startlingstatistics in perspective thus,:

“We have the second richestbillionaire in the world in dollarsand we have the fourth largestnumber of billionaires in theplanet. But we are 126th inhuman development. The samenation that ranks fourth (in termsof number of ) billionaires ranks126th in human development.

What does it meanto be 126th? Itmeans that it isbetter to be a poorperson in Bolivia(the poorest nationin South America)

or Guatemala or Gabon. They areahead of us in the UN’s HumanDevelopment Index.”

We are the emerging ‘tigereconomy.’ But life expectancy inour nation is lower than it is inBolivia, Kazakhstan andMongolia. We have 100,000 dollar

millionaires, out of whom 25,000reside in my city of Mumbai, I amproud to say. Yet, 836 millionpeople in our nation exist on lessthan Rs. 20/- a day according tothe Government of India. There is

But we are 126th in humandevelopment. The same nationthat ranks fourth (in terms of number of ) billionaires ranks126th in human development.




no such thing as Indian reality.There are Indian realities. Thereis a multiplicity of realities.”

A report of the Food and Agriculture Organisation showsthat between the period from1995-97 to 1999-2001, India addedmore newly hungry millions thanthe rest of the world takentogether. The average rural familynow consumes significantly lessthan what it was consumingearlier. Indebtedness has doubledover the pastdecade. Cultivationcosts haveincreasedexorbitantly andfarming incomeshave collapsed,leading to suicidesby farmers.

In the words of Sainath, while there were 512accredited journalists covering theLakme India Fashion Week, therewere only six journalists to coverthe suicides in Vidharbha. In thatFashion Week programme, themodels were displaying cotton

garments while the men andwomen who grew the cotton werekilling themselves an hour awayby flight from Nagpur, in the

Vidharbha region. Nobody told

that story except one or two journalists locally.

At a seminar on “Changing Face of

Indian Media: What needs to bedone?” organised by the Centre forEconomic and Social Studies inHyderabad, Bella Mody of theUniversity of Colorado argued thatIndia needs a journalismcurriculum and professional normssuited to its unique power contextand the need for research to arriveat what needs to be done locally

and that domesticauthors need tostep up to the plateand write textbooksfor ourselves.

It was argued andrightly so that1960s American

textbooks are beingused to teach

journalism in India. Thepublishers of these outdated booksare happy to have developingcountries print these on the cheapand sell them. Cut-copy-pasteculture sadly exists in this areatoo.

During the course of deliberations,it was also mentioned that

journalists were trained on the jobin India in the old days by sittingon the bench at a newspaper while

India needs a journalismcurriculum and professionalnorms suited to its uniquepower context and the need forresearch to arrive at whatneeds to be done locally andthat domestic authors need tostep up to the plate and writetextbooks for ourselves.




getting hands on training. Now,this training has been convertedinto a business. Most mediahouses have now set up their own

media schools. This kind of profitdriven training is along the linesof the “grab money and push themout” model that is the trend withmost training programs today.With no uniform curriculum, thismethod too fails the Indian

journalism student.

The stark contrast betweenEnglish and regional languagemedia also figured prominently inthe debate. Among the issues thatcame up was that more masala innews is encouraged in the locallanguage media. Infotainmentitusplagues the regional press morethan the English media, very fewworking journalists in regionalmedia had formal university-typetraining as against their Englishcounterparts. Most significantly,severe salary disparities existedbetween the English and regionalmedia and advertising revenuewas higher for English papers asopposed to language papersdespite larger readership.

The double standards practised bythe media is another majorchallenge. Ever since the ghastlyDelhi bus gang rape incident,television channels have been

working overtime espousing thecase of women but they haveabsolutely no qualms allowingadvertisements which commodify

women and use them as mere sexsymbols. All the advocacy onwomen’s rights and vehementopposition to their projection assex symbols gets diluted duringthe commercial break when theviewer is shown semi clad womenselling cars and men’sundergarments and swooning over

men using a particular brand of deodorant.

If the media is so committed to thecause of women, why don’t theysay a no to advertisementsportraying women in such ademeaning manner as they do inthe case of liquor and cigaretteadvertisements.

One can go on and on but what isrequired is a serious introspection,even as the Indian media raises itsfingers at politicians, bureaucratsand others. The need of the hour isa serious re-look and review of media’s priorities. To rephrase acliché phrase, this Caesar’s wife

must be above suspicion,superstition, superficiality andsycophancy.

Back to Contents




Visit Of Delegation From RCDS, UK To VIF

20 member delegation from

the Royal College of DefenceStudies (RCDS) visited the

Vivekananda InternationalFoundation (VIF) on 14 May, 2013for a Round Table Discussion thatcovered a wide range of issues.The RCDS delegation was led by

Air Commodore (Retd) S Abbott.Welcoming the guests Lt Gen

(Retd) Ravi Sawhney talked abouthis time spent inRCDS and how muchhe cherished thememories of hisassociation with theRCDS. He noted theemergence of newthreats, both

traditional as well asnon traditional, sincehis tenure at the RCDS in 1989,which he acknowledged was awatershed year in InternationalPolitics.

Mr Ajit Doval, Director VIF gavethe Opening Remarks and his

assessment about the enigmaticcharacter of India, its strengthsand weaknesses, role in global andregional affairs, its futuretrajectory etc. He highlightedIndia’s important geo-politicallocation, size, rising economic

power and demography, its

pluralistic society as well ashaving a stable constitutionaldemocracy with strong defencecapabilities. He touched upon theproblems and challenges faced byIndia that included environmentalconcerns, food and water security,the effect of global terrorism, therise of Islamic radicalism and

terrorism in Pakistan and changesin Afghanistan thatwould have an impacton the region. Whetherthe rise of China wouldbe peaceful or could itbecome a destabilizingfactor in the regionwas another important

issue that was touchedupon by him.

The need to develop strategicthinking was stressed by AirCommodore (Retd) S Abbott,leader of the RCDS delegation, inhis opening remarks.

Amb PP Shukla presented afunctional categorization of whereIndia is and spoke at length aboutissues that were of priority forIndia. Essential constitutionalrequirements and commitmentsensuring sovereignty, territorial




integrity and security of thecountry required a strong defencesector, a strong economy, and anactive diplomacy. Giving an

overview of the defence sector, hehighlighted the desire of self reliance related to defenceequipment althoughacknowledging that there washuge import dependence. Issuessuch as technology transfers,offsets and end use monitoringthat underlie India’s defence

procurement were flagged by AmbShukla. India’s impressiveeconomic growth was traced byhim, that moved from a socialistpattern to following a liberaleconomic order in the 1990’s. Howfar this growth has been inclusivewas also discussed. Increasedeconomic engagement of India post

1990’s with the world washighlighted. Pakistan and Chinawere identified as a cause of concern for India. According tohim, the fundamental problemwith Pakistan is not Kashmir butthe inability of Pakistan to find anidentity for itself, except in a wayto oppose India in every way itcan. With respect to Afghanistan,the narrative that Al Qaeda isfinished, Taliban and Pakistanhave changed and therefore thingswould turn out well after 2014were described as being far fromthe truth. Stressing the need for

the current government to befinancially and materially secureas being essential to be able tohold on their own in a similar

manner as the Najibullahgovernment was in 1989 when theSoviet’s withdrew due to thefinancial support given to them bythe Soviets. As soon as financialsupport was withdrawn,Najibullah government fell.

Gen NC Vij gave his perceptionabout Sino- Indian relations andthe security aspects in the AsiaPacific region. Two issues thatwere identified by him as a causeof concern in terms of the securitycalculus of the region were therapid rise of China and the spreadof Islamic Fundamentalism andterrorism in the region. TheChinese providing nuclearcapability to Pakistan, investmentin the Port of Gwadar, the stringof pearls around India, challengingIndia’s sovereignty by staplingvisa’s, mentioning only 2000kmsas the land boundary it shareswith India as against the actual4000kms, their claim over

Arunachal Pradesh and the recent15 day intrusion in Ladakh weresome of the issues highlighted byGen Vij that were of concern toIndia. The Indian response,however to these issues is largelydictated by it being a peace loving




nation having other priorities likeremoving poverty rather thanspending on defence. The Indianstance therefore has stressed on

the co-existence of the twoeconomic giants and co-operationto work towards the betterment of the world rather than confrontingeach other. In addition, the USChina relationship, Japan Chinarelations, the Taiwanese issue, theKorean Peninsula, South ChinaSea and Myanmar’s Sittwe Port

were also discussed and identifiedas factors that affect the securityscenario in the Asia PacificRegion.

Amb Satish Chandra spoke aboutIndia’s nuclear deterrent strategyand the reasoning behind theirSSBN capability development vis-à-vis the risk of an arms race withPakistan and China. In his talk

Amb. Chandra demonstrated thatIndia’s nuclearization and strategyhas in fact not contributed to aregional arms race in the region.He wove his talk around threebasic strands, firstly India’saversion to nuclear weapons, thefactors that have impelled India togo nuclear and the strategy itself.He spoke about the evolution of

nuclear doctrine and presented itsmain features. Expanding on theconcept of Credible NuclearDeterrence which is the core of the

document taken together with nofirst use and non use which clearlyenvisages that India views itsnuclear weapons only as adeterrent for defensive purposesand not as a means to threatenothers or build a huge armsarsenal or engage in arms race. Healso highlighted that survivability

of India’s nuclear forces that needsa combination of multipleredundant system viz. mobility,dispersion and deception, bringingout the importance of a triad anddeveloping SSBN capability.

The presentations were followedby a vigourous questions andanswers session which pertainedto India’s security environmentand the evolving scenario in

Afghanistan. Leader of the RCDSin his closing remarks expressedhis keen desire to further interactwith the VIF Faculty in the future.

Back to Contents




Vimarsha On Islamic Radicalism In South

Asia – Implications For India

n 28th May 2013, VIForganized Vimarsha, whereeminent author and

columnist Hiranmay Karlekardelivered an enlightening lectureon “Islamic Radicalism in South

Asia – Implications for India”. Thesession was chaired by Ajit Doval,KC, Director VIF, who succinctly

summed up various dimensions of the subject thatwere to beaddressed.

Karlekar began histalk by assessing thelong term strategy of organizations such

as Al Qaeda. Analyzing theirpsyche and doctrine, Heemphasized that their strategywill be to strengthen their control,firstly, in the Middle East and inNorthern Africa, following whichthey will target entire Africa andEurope. He also highlighted that

Al Qaeda would attempt to spreadand diffuse their bases of operations, making itscontainment and eliminationfurther difficult. A vital part of their doctrine, as Karlekarunderlined, is Islamic

Radicalization. He examinedvarious factions in the Islamicsociety and argued that thehardliners have the tendency toreassert on the rest and dictateterms. Radicalization has been aneffective tool of the hardliners andhas been utilized well so far.

Considering the case of South Asia, the veteranauthor stressed thatthe times ahead aregoing to bechallenging forIndia. Pakistancontinues to exportterrorism and it is

unclear who or whatrepresents Pakistan,their Government, their Army orthe ISI, for us to assess whether ornot there has been a change inPakistan. Afghanistan faces toughdays ahead with the withdrawal of the Western forces. Karlekarpredicted that it could well be arepeat of 1989-91, where thecivilian government wouldvaliantly fight the Taliban, buteventually succumb to radicalforces, due to insufficient financialassistance given by foreignpowers.

O



Bangladesh, Karlekar argued,currently has one of the strongestleaders in Sheikh Hasina as itsPrime Minister who can fight off

radicalization. She is also veryimportant for India in the fightagainst Islamic radicalism andIndia must do its best tostrengthen her government before

the early 2014 national electionsto ensure that hardliners are keptat bay.

The session was concluded with abrief round of Q&A.

Back to Contents

vivek issues n options june 2013

Documents