The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Kashmir cries for peace
No harm in phased withdrawal of AFSPA

Any measure that helps in ending the unrest in the Kashmir valley is welcome. Thus, the move to amend the controversial Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) to give it a more humane face is a step in the right direction. The AFSPA never got as much bad publicity as it did during the last three months, when the valley experienced a cycle of violence leading to the death of 69 persons, mostly when security forces resorted to firing to disperse stone-throwing protesters. The security forces have been accused of being trigger-happy, cocooned in the protection provided by the controversial Act. This was contrary to the established practice of using tear gas shells or other non-lethal weapons. It is, therefore, not a bad idea if the Centre has made up its mind to withdraw the AFSPA in a phased manner, making it ineffective in a few districts in the first stage, as suggested by Chief Minister Omar Abdullah. In any case, there is no point in deploying the security forces in the districts where the level of violence has come down to a negligible level.

The Chief Minister is not the only one to have sought the AFSPA to be suitably amended to help restore peace in the valley. Very few people want it to remain intact in its present form. People’s sentiments cannot be ignored. A special package of compensation to those who have lost their dear ones during the current phase of unrest will go a long way in bringing down the temperature in Kashmir. Special efforts are also needed to create enough employment opportunities for the needy.

However, this may not be enough to satisfy the separatists. They have their own agenda, and hence their attempt to exploit people’s sentiments on every available occasion. Yet they, too, should be invited to the dialogue that is likely to be initiated soon to discuss the larger issue of autonomy. Those who refuse to participate in the talks should be exposed as enemies of the Kashmiris. There is need to show urgency in addressing the growing alienation among the people so that separatists and extremists are unable to mislead them.

Real-life Munnabhais
Admission frauds are no joke

WHENEVER any well-meaning special facility is provided, there are always people waiting in the wings to misuse it. One such scheme is Direct Admission of Students Abroad (DASA), under which eligible foreign nationals, persons of Indian origin (PIOs) and non-resident Indians (NRIs) are admitted to undergraduate engineering programmes offered by the National Institutes of Technology (formerly Regional Engineering Colleges) and other centrally funded institutions (other than IITs) and Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh. It seems to have been hijacked by some, 11 of whom got admission to the Chandigarh college alone by using fake documents. According to preliminary reports, a Hisar doctor gave them fake Nepalese identity cards by charging Rs 10 to 15 lakh from each student.

The CBI is seized of the matter and is conducting inquiries. As a result, a reputed centre of learning has come in for negative publicity. Actually, the fault does not exactly lie with the PEC because the Union Ministry of Human Resources has entrusted the central coordination of admissions under the DASA scheme to the National Institute of Technology, Surathkal. The students who thus tried to make way into a professional college fraudulently – like the lead character of the film Munnabhai MBBS – have not only ruined their own careers but have also brought a bad name to the institution.

Due to the acute shortage of good colleges, there is always a mad scramble for admissions. And there are enough unscrupulous persons to take the admission seekers for a ride. It is good that the conspiracy was detected fairly early. This will put the fear of the law in the minds of the wrong-doers. But there are far too many of them eager to employ underhand means. A consistent drive against them will be necessary to keep them out of business. An unqualified person getting admission into a medical or engineering college fraudulently may be good for a few laughs in a film but such an incident taking place in real life is simply not acceptable because it brings the entire education system into disrepute.

Thought for the Day

People must not do things for fun. We are not here for fun. There is no reference to fun in any Act of Parliament. — A.P. Herbert

ARTICLE

Chinese challenge to US
It’s reflected in increased focus on Pakistan
by K. Subrahmanyam

Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping was reported to have given to his successors a typical Chinese style advice, which said, “Observe calmly; secure our position; cope with affairs calmly; hide our capacities and bide our time; be good at maintaining a low profile; and never claim leadership.”

It is widely believed that this advice was the foundation on which the Chinese strategy of “rising peacefully” was based till recently. China has overtaken Japan in purchase parity price terms with the second largest GDP in the world and is expected to become the number one in the next 20-25 years. There was also a widespread international debate for some time on the possibility a G-2 (US and China) managing the international financial system.

The Chinese leadership today , however, appears to be tempted to discard the advice of Deng and start asserting itself.

Perhaps, it is encouraged by the fact that while it has been able to get back to its earlier pre-financial crisis growth rate, the US and Europe are still struggling hard to recover. There are major differences in the approach of Europe, attempting to avoid inflation, and that of the US where a case is being made for a second stimulus. The impression gaining ground the world over is that the US power is declining and the Chinese power is growing.

China is paying particular attention to the expansion of its naval power. It is continuing the build-up of its ballistic missiles and hunter-killer nuclear submarines, is planning to build an aircraft carrier and is developing a low-altitude cruise missile which can pose threats to US aircraft carriers. The Chinese confidence has grown to such an extent that one Chinese Admiral suggested to his US counterpart that the Pacific Ocean should be divided into two zones of influence between the US and China. Beijing has started objecting to the US, Japanese and South Korean navies holding exercises in the Yellow Sea in international waters on the basis of a new theory they are proclaiming that though they may be international waters, they are “waters of interest” of China, involving its far-sea defence and a core concern and, therefore, the Chinese do not favour other navies conducting exercises there.

This is a new kind of Monroe doctrine in the 21st century after an international Law of the Seas has been adopted. China has territorial disputes in the South China Sea with a number of ASEAN nations. While the ASEAN nations want to arrive at a collective dispute settlement, the Chinese insist on dealing with each ASEAN country individually. The recent support extended by the US Secretary of State to the ASEAN nations evoked an angry Chinese reaction. China also has an unresolved dispute with Japan on the Senkaku island.

China under Mao used to maintain that all peace-loving nations had a right to have nuclear weapons and did not accede to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), though it had been accepted as a nuclear weapon power. Beijing discovered that nuclear proliferation could be used as an effective instrument to expand influence. Deng chose Pakistan and North Korea, an Islamic country and a Marxist one, to proliferate nuclear and missile capabilities with its main focus on Pakistan. Since the US leaned heavily on the Pakistani support for its mujahideen campaign against the Soviet forces in Afghanistan, Washington was permissive of Chinese proliferation activity to help Islamabad. It also served Chinese interests by countervailing India.

China and Pakistan pushed the US permissiveness to the extent of conducting the test for the Pakistani nuclear weapon on the Chinese test site, Lop Nor, on May 26, 1990. That led to the invocation of the Pressler Amendment sanctions against Pakistan by the US, but Washington chose to keep quiet. China followed up with the supply of missiles to Pakistan. Though China joined the NPT in 1992, it continued to violate it with the supply of vital ring magnets for Pakistani centrifuges. China was privy to the Pakistan-North Korea missile-for-uranium-enrichment-technology-exchange deal. Pakistan, in its turn, attempted to proliferate to Iran and Libya.

Pakistan, shielded by its nuclear deterrent capability, initiated a campaign of terrorism as an instrument of state policy first against India and then against the US and the UK. That country became the epicentre of terrorism. China continued its support to Pakistani nuclear efforts by building two plutonium research reactors at Khushab and two civilian power rectors at Chashma.

In the late 1980s China sold long-range CSS-2 liquid-fuelled missiles to Saudi Arabia. Such missiles were of little use unless they were fitted with nuclear warheads. Presumably, they would have received the Pakistani warheads when needed. There have been modest clandestine Chinese help for Iran’s nuclear and missile programmes. All this happened in a low-key style since the US was permissive of Pakistani proliferation and was getting snared into supporting China’s industrial expansion, which produced massive trade surpluses vis-a-vis the US.

That period is over .China is now asserting its equality with the US, insisting on supplying Pakistan two nuclear power reactors without the waiver of the guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group as was done at US urging in the case of India in view of Delhi’s impeccable nonproliferation record. While the US is trying to woo the Pakistan Army with military aid and Kerry-Lugar economic aid to fight the jihadi groups within Pakistan, China is undertaking a number of projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, planning to construct road and rail links between Xinjiang and Pakistan through the Baltistan-Gilgit area, and laying an oil and gas pipeline from Gwadar port — which was earlier constructed by China — to Xinjiang.

It is reported that a large number of PLA personnel are working in the Baltistan-Gilgit area. Now by insisting on stapled visas for Indians from J&K and not insisting on similar stapled visas for people from POK, China is telling the world that it backs Pakistan’s claim to Kashmir even as the US is adopting a neutral attitude. China is signalling to Pakistan Army chief Gen Ashfaque Kayani that, unlike the US, Beijing fully supports him on his demand on Kashmir. China is Pakistan’s largest arms supplier and has a joint aircraft and tank production arrangement with Islamabad.

If China is to achieve equality with the US in terms of power or overtake it, the latter has to be challenged both in East Asia and West Asia. Their naval expansion is the East Asian challenge and their increasing involvement with Pakistan is the first step in countervailing US power in West Asia.

MIDDLE

Lessons in protocol
by Rachna Singh

PROTOCOL was just another word in the dictionary for me. But that was before I joined the civil services. My first encounter with protocol happened the day I landed at the National Police Academy, Hyderabad, for my foundation course. Feeling listless and ravenous after a long journey I trudged into the dining hall in my track suit thinking I would grab some dinner and then ‘hit the sack’.

But as soon as I entered the dining hall I was met with a sea of disapproving eyes belonging to ‘probationers’ formally dressed in ‘bandh gala’ and starched cotton saris. It seems I had violated a strict dress code by entering the hallowed precincts of the dining hall in ‘casuals’. I beat a hasty retreat and decided to forgo the dinner despite the loud demands of my stomach.

The next day I was hauled up for my breach of protocol and made to run an extra mile as a ‘warning’. Before I could recover from this disaster I made another faux pas. We were lined up for introductions before the course director. I introduced myself with as much dignity as I could muster considering my recent ignominy and put my hand out for a professional shake. The course director eyed my hand in disgust and folded his hands in a ‘namaste’ that would put any coy soap opera character to shame. Lesson learnt: lady officers do not shake hands.

A few days later I reluctantly reported for riding classes. The riding session began with a lecture, God help me, on the protocol involved in mounting a horse. We stood to attention on the left side of our assigned horses as in a stentorian voice the ‘Ustadji’ took us through our paces.

At the count of ‘One’ we were to put our left leg into the stirrup. At the count of ‘Two’ we were to heave ourselves up and lift our right leg over the backside of the mount. At the count of ‘three’ we were to seat ourselves in the saddle, slip our right leg into the stirrup and gently pick up the reins for the ritual trot around the paddock.

But woe betide the rider who violated this regimented protocol as I did. At the count of ‘Two’ I tried scaling the horse instead of elegantly mounting it. At Ustadji’s loud reprimand I yanked at the reins in desperation and ‘Sundari’ (my horse) reading it as a command took off at great speed. By the time the horse stopped I had sent up my last prayers to the Almighty. It finally registered — ‘protocol’ was a matter of life and death. From that day I took to protocol like the proverbial duck to water.

OPED DEFENCE

As newer security paradigms emerge, civil and military worlds, which are essentially distinct, must co-exist without posing a danger to democracy or to the effectiveness of the military. The subject continues to attract serious research worldwide
Civil and military leaders need to bridge the gaps
Air Marshal Brijesh D. Jayal (Retd)

Across the world the form and content of security challenges is altering. Insurgency and terrorist threats are far more difficult to face as they blur distinctions between friend or foe and bring in the concept of treating a potential threat with kid gloves. Add to this the rapidly advancing information age technologies and a competitive media and it is easy to see why civil--military relations continue to be a subject of serious research and study by scholars.

Ever since the end of the Second World War, the subject has been discussed and debated in the US at great length. The perennial debate regarding civil-military relations recently received a fillip when the US President sacked the commander of US forces in Afghanistan.

In essence, scholars agree that civil and military worlds are essentially distinct and different from one another and that the military must work under the authority of the elected government. The problem was to see that they coexisted without posing a danger to democracy or to the effectiveness of the military. The debate is by no means over and the subject continues to draw research and academic work internationally even as newer security paradigms emerge.

In India while the subject is considered too sensitive to even be discussed, there is an added twist to the scene. For historical reasons civilian control of the military here has come to mean control by the bureaucracy. This added layer creates an undesirable screen between the elected leadership and the military and has often been the cause of both misunderstanding and subterfuge. In this distorted sense, Indian democracy remains unique.

Recently the White House announced that Maj Gen John D. Lavelle had been posthumously reinstated as a full General. This story reveals the underbelly of civil--military relations in a democracy and is worth revisiting. Lavelle, US Air Force commander in Vietnam, was accused of ordering unauthorised bombing raids against North Vietnam and then falsifying reports to cover-up. This was when there was considerable opposition to the war in the US and President Nixon had overtly halted
bombing operations.

Lavelle insisted he never exceeded his authority and followed rules of engagement communicated to him by Washington. Notwithstanding this, the Pentagon and Congress considered him guilty. Demoted to Major General and forced to retire in disgrace, he told Congress, "It is not pleasant to contemplate ending a long and distinguished military career with a catastrophic blemish on my record, a blemish for conscientiously doing the job I was expected to do.

Records now in public domain, reveal that Nixon had indeed given secret orders for the bombings, which had been relayed down the chain of command. Lavelle died in 1979, an honourable man only in his own eyes. To the nation, the system and those he commanded, he was shown to be dishonourable. Clearly, the civilian and higher military leadership displayed conduct not worthy of healthy democratic institutions or morals. This in the wider sense gets to the heart of the perpetual debate on the conflicting dynamics of civil-military relations in a democracy.

Both in Manipur disturbances of 2004 and more recent ones in Kashmir, even as the state and central governments grappled to control the situation, politicians targeted the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, seeking its withdrawal. Invariably, the government of the day, that is upholder of this Act and whose sole discretion it is to designate areas where it will apply, and from whom the army derives its strength and authority, preferred to remain ambivalent and promised to make the Act more humane. Unsaid have been insinuations by vested political and human rights activists of the army embracing the Act to indulge in human rights violations.

There are three constituents that make for civil-military relations in a democracy - civil society, elected government and the military. Of these it is only the military that has no public voice and is hence easily disadvantaged when targeted in complex issues like AFSPA.

In a 1997 dissertation at the Rand Graduate School, titled "Civil Military Relations — A Comparative Study of India and Pakistan", Kotera M.Bhimaya makes some observations in the Indian context. He observes that in Parliament, defence matters seldom receive the desired attention and even service chiefs are prone to make statements to reinforce politicians' proclamation that armed forces will not fail. A more disturbing observation relates to Indian military brass sometimes succumbing to political or bureaucratic pressure for promotion or foreign assignments.

On bureaucracy and the military corporate interests, He quotes the military view, contradicted by the bureaucracy, that bureaucracy has consistently frustrated recommendations pertaining to a unified Ministry of Defence that would not only effect savings, but bring better coordination. Further, the military feels that bureaucracy knows little, exploits inter-service differences and endeavours to distance military and political leadership.

Few will deny the validity of these observations. Worse, nothing has changed in the intervening years notwithstanding the Kargil Review Committee report and the far reaching lessons that were supposed to have been learnt. As security challenges in India become more complex with insurgency, terrorist and Maoist challenges coming to the fore, the dynamics of the relationship between the civil society, the government and the military will continue to come under greater strain. While the former two have the benefit of debate, the latter is denied this option. If occasionally, commanders let off steam as Gen McChrysatal did, it should come as no surprise. It behoves genuine democracies to keep the fine balance between the three arms in order to strengthen democracy. In this India has a very long way to go. Perhaps an open debate on the optimum model to suit India can be a healthy starting point.

The author is former AOC-in-C, South Western Air Command

Knowledge deficit shoots down Media-military relations
Col (Dr) Sudhir Sakhuja (Retd)

A host of reasons hinder military media relations in India, prominent among which is the lack of knowledge about each other There is lack of shared understanding which is, perhaps, indispensable for working in unison. If we look around the media - military scene today, it is difficult to find more than a score of Indian journalists who are well informed of matters military. Most of the correspondents on the defence beat are able to report only on the "what" of news without much of a clue of the "how" and even lesser of the "why" of it. What can the military expect from the correspondents, including some from the mainstream national media, who do not know the difference between say a brigade and a corps, or for that matter the ethos and functional aspects, especially constraints, of different arms and services?

Till 1991, the copies of correspondents covering defence were cleared by the Directorate of the Public Relations. Call it censoring, but it ensured some professional inputs being added by the service representatives.

Many changes have since happened in the media, which has grown exponentially. Technology has changed the way news is gathered, produced and disseminated. Consequently, pressure on the military to be responsive to their needs has increased many folds.

As for the military's understanding of the media, the scene is only marginally better. With a few exceptions, not many understand the nuances of the media. The military, especially the Army, too has witnessed many changes since the 1980's - the period coinciding with resurgence of militancy in Kashmir and the ULFA--Bodo movement in Assam. Countering irregular warfare, once a secondary task, has now become its primary focus. As if that was not enough, it has a new challenge - facing a largely aggressive, if not entirely hostile, "irregular" media. The media today is largely wild in terms of numbers, variety and languages. Importantly it is unregulated. The new media in all its avatars - blogs, tweets and networking sites, adds to the confusion of military's understanding of the media.

Some steps have been taken by the military to understand the media. Media relations are now included as a part of study in various training courses and special programmes conducted by the IIMC. Some seminars, like that on media--military synergy at New Delhi last week, are also conducted. It needs to be noted that these initiatives have come mainly from the Army and not the media. Directorate of Public Relations (DPR) in the defence ministry exposes around 35 correspondents to a month-long defence correspondents' course every year. It is another story though that only a couple of them later cover the defence beat!

"Noble" as these baby steps may be, the military, even if somewhat knowledgeable of the media, has not been entirely responsive to their needs. The military cannot keep pace with the flow of news, which by itself is direct fallout of the technology advancement. Media deadlines have become shorter. Military does not entirely understand the essence of time and media deadlines. In any case, news must travel through a maze of channels within the military hierarchy before it can be shared with the media. Due to their culture of cross checking facts, militaries all over the world -- and Indian forces are no exception, are agonizingly slow in responding to a story. In the time so taken by the military, media, especially electronic media, "breaks" news -- right or erroneous. And since the first news sticks, the military gets into a fire-fighting mode, often with its back to the wall.

Military also need to be educated on being less sensitive to occasional criticism as it may not necessarily paint the entire military uniformly black. In any case, if bad news is released by the military itself -- which rarely happens, it adds to its credibility. This is rarely understood in perspective by the military.

That media often reports without cross checking with the military only adds to the problem. Media hunger for stories also needs to be satisfied by the military. This does not happen, as there is no system in place to regularly update media. As such, correspondents are often found snooping for news from sources even less knowledgeable than themselves.

The military and the public relations set up in the ministry also need to understand the importance of different types of media. There is an undue focus on national and English language media. While such media definitely has an impact on the decision makers in Delhi, the vernacular media which influences the masses is often afforded a step motherly treatment.

Though the impact of images provided by the electronic media is not to be underestimated, the written word still reigns supreme. As for the new media, at least in the Indian context, it will take some more years to be a major opinion maker. Military needs to understand this and focus its limited media related resources accordingly.

The military is also not appreciative of the financial constraints and commercial interests of the media. Good-news stories are often chopped out to make space for revenue earning advertisements. Correspondents have come to accept this, while the military needs to appreciate it better.

Finally, even if the military is knowledgeable of the power of moving pictures, it does not have any outfit to provide videos to the media of its actions where the media cannot reach or is not present. Clearly there is a knowledge and appreciation deficit on part of both media and military. It is in interest of both to bridge the same and earlier the better.

The author is a former spokesperson of the Indian Army