The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

ARTICLE

Leverage the goodwill in Dhaka
India and Bangladesh interests are diverging
Harsh V. Pant

External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj returned from a successful visit to Bangladesh recently. In line with the Modi government’s focus on strengthening ties with South Asian neighbours, this visit was timely and will have a positive impact on the Dhaka-Delhi ties, especially as Swaraj chose Bangladesh for her first stand-alone foreign visit since assuming office. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has done well to promptly accept her invitation to visit Bangladesh, hoping that a ‘new era’ of cooperation would be fostered across South Asia to ignite the collective surge for prosperity. Though Swaraj could only assure her Bangladeshi counterparts of an early ratification of the Land Boundary Agreement and signing of an interim agreement on Teesta water sharing, she moved forward with a five-year multiple-entry visa for Bangladeshi nationals below 13 and above 65 as well as starting a Dhaka-Shillong-Gauhati bus service on an experimental basis.

New Delhi has had two problems in Bangladesh. It is seen as particularly close to the Hasina government by large sections of Bangladesh’s population despite its earlier attempts to reach out to Khaleda Zia. On the other hand, pro-India forces have felt neglected, given New Delhi’s inability to strengthen Hasina’s hands. Though India has repeatedly signalled that it remains committed to an early solution to the problem of sharing the Teesta waters and the long-pending boundary issue, it has not been able to generate sufficient political consensus on these issues. New Delhi has not been a great partner to Dhaka so far and by not signing the deals that matter most to Dhaka, it has alienated the pro-India forces in the country.

India did make some initial strong overtures to the Hasina government. Pranab Mukherjee visited Dhaka in 2010 as the then Finance Minister to mark the signing of a $1-billion loan deal, the largest line of credit received by Bangladesh under a single agreement. India’s Exim Bank had signed the line of credit agreement with Bangladesh's economic relations division and the loan was to be used to develop railways and communications infrastructure. The deal carried 1.75 per cent annual interest and is repayable in 20 years, including a five-year grace period. It was offered during Hasina’s visit to India in January 2010. This was followed by the two countries signing a 35-year electricity transmission deal under which India will be exporting up to 500MW power to Bangladesh. Dhaka has also signed a $1.7 billion pact with the National Thermal Power Corporation for the construction of two coal-fired plants in southern Bangladesh.

Despite the initiatives, India failed to build on the momentum provided by this visit with its failure to implement two major agreements-finalisation of land boundary demarcation and the sharing of the waters of the Teesta. Bangladesh has been rightly upset at the slow pace of their implementation. Hasina has taken great political risk to put momentum back into bilateral ties. But there has been no serious attempt on India's part to settle the outstanding issues.

Bureaucratic inertia and lack of political will have prevented many deals from getting followed through. Dhaka is seeking response to its demand for the removal of the tariff and non-tariff barriers on Bangladeshi products. India has failed to reciprocate Hasina's overtures. The BNP has used the India-Bangladesh bonhomie under Hasina to attack the government for toeing India's line. Bilateral ties had reached their lowest ebb during the 2001-06 tenure of the BNP government.

India has failed to capitalise on the propitious political circumstances in Bangladesh, damaging its credibility even further. Friends are as temporary as enemies in international politics. Instead, it is a state’s national interests that determine its foreign policy. In case of India and Bangladesh, these interests have been diverging for some years, making the bilateral relationship susceptible to domestic political narratives.

India is the crux around which Bangladeshi parties define their foreign policy agenda. This shouldn’t be a surprise, given India’s size and geographic linkages. Over the years political parties opposing the Awami League (AL) have tended to define themselves in opposition to India, in effect portraying AL as India’s “stooge”. Also, radical Islamic groups have tried to buttress their own “Islamic identities” by attacking India.

Ever since she came to power in December 2008, Hasina has faced challenges from right-wing parties and fundamentalist outfits like Jamaat-e-Islami and Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen, which enjoy Pakistan's support. These groups are united in undermining efforts to improve ties with New Delhi. The greatest challenge that Hasina overcame in her first year was the mutiny by the paramilitary Bangladesh Rifles that erupted in February 2009. It soon became clear the mutineers were being instigated by supporters of the opposition led by the BNP and others connected to Jamaat-e-Islami. India supported Hasina’s crackdown on the mutineers by sealing its borders and forcing back mutineers attempting to cross over.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited Dhaka in September 2011 and was all set to sign the Teesta pact. But West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee made sure his plan got derailed at the last minute, damaging India's credibility greatly. Singh ultimately managed to sign the land boundary pact that demarcates territorial sovereignty along the 4,000-km Indo-Bangladesh frontier. But even in this case, where Bangladesh has ratified the pact, India has failed to move forward because of the need for a constitutional amendment.

The political dispensation in New Delhi should recognise the dangers of playing party politics with India's foreign and security policy. India is witnessing rising turmoil all around its borders and, therefore, a stable, moderate Bangladesh is in its long-term interests. Constructive Indo-Bangladesh ties can be a major stabilising factor for the south Asian region as a whole. It can't afford to ignore Dhaka. As the forces of moderation and extremism battle it out in Bangladesh, India has a crucial stake in the outcome. It can only be hoped that the momentum generated by the External Affairs Minister in Dhaka will not be lost and Delhi will effectively leverage the goodwill in Dhaka towards the new Modi government.

MIDDLE

Sharing life with drivers
Sanjeev Bariana

Forced to keep a driver as I cannot drive, I was looking for a new one at my current place of posting in Bathinda when I remembered how, actually, hiring and maintaining drivers had proved to be one of the most interesting and important parts of my daily life over the past nearly decade and a half.

The first one, Baljeet Singh, had a licence issued from some God-forsaken place to show, the day he came to meet me outside my office. He looked underage, bearing sprouts of fresh hair on his child-like face. He had forced a turban on his head to give an impression of being a grown-up. I kept him because he had agreed to work for a salary which I could afford to pay.

I knew I had exciting times ahead when I saw that he did not know how to even open the lid of the petrol tank when we went to a gas station on the first day of his job. Noticing that I was watching him sit tense at the steering, Baljeet said: “I used to drive a mini truck.”

He hit a Kinetic Honda on the university campus once and another time hit a vegetable ‘rehri’ in the Grain Market. However, slowly he settled down and gave a very dedicated service for more than five years.

The second, Soni, brought along a pack of compact discs of Punjabi songs which he put on when I sat in the car on the first day. He had shown me that I would have to listen to noisy music in his company. He was more than often late for his job and would vanish for days together without informing me. But he was an honest man who worked selflessly, never made any demands and took great care of my household matters, including purchases and repairs. Most importantly, he went along very well with my son who was very young.

He had joined me after his stint as a tractor driver in the garbage-dumping yard of Chandigarh. While using my car as his learning tool, he once banged into the wall of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya in Sector 25 and another time in a three-wheeler bruising the side of my car, a beauty spot my Zen sports till date.

Another diver was lean and dark Vicky, who came to my house in Ludhiana, all drenched on a rainy day. “I am Vicky. I can drive; however, I don’t have a driving licence”, he announced.

Almost instinctively, I asked him to come the next day. He had once hit the car against the side gate of the house. He asked me too many questions: “What is your salary? Are you married? Why do you stay alone?” He even said: “You give me Rs 500 less; it seems you don’t save much”.

I shifted back to Chandigarh more than five years ago and he went to Dubai. Very recently I got a call from him: “Bhaji, kiddan?” (Brother, how are you?) I want to send you Rs 2 lakh to help you buy a new car because I had crashed your Zen many a time and in the process learnt how to drive”.

oped-security

Finalise national security policy urgently
N. N. Vohra

The most urgent need for the Central Government is to secure appropriate understanding with the states for finalising an appropriate national security policy and putting in place a modern, fully coordinated security-management system which can effectively negate any arising challenge to the territorial security, unity and integrity of India. It would be useful, at the very outset, to state that, in simple language, the term “national security” could be defined to comprise external security, which relates to safeguarding the country against war and external aggression, and internal security which relates to the maintenance of public order and normalcy within the country.

External issues

The first generation of India's security analysts, who focused attention almost entirely on issues relating to external security, had found it convenient to distinguish issues relating to external and internal security. However, such a segregated approach is no longer feasible, particularly after the advent of terrorism which has introduced extremely frightening dimensions to the internal security environment. I would go further to say that issues of internal and external security management have been inextricably intertwined ever since Pakistan launched a proxy war in Jammu and Kashmir in early 1990 and Pak-based jihadi terrorists started establishing networks in our country.

Geopolitical developments

Our national security interests have continued to be influenced and affected by geo-political developments in our region and far beyond. In the context of the experience gained, it is extremely important that, besides all necessary steps being taken for safeguarding India's territorial security and establishing a very strong machinery to counter terrorism, close attention is also paid for effectively securing other important arenas, particularly those relating to food, water, environment and ecology, science and technology, energy, nuclear power, economy, cyber security, et al.

While evolving a holistic approach towards national security management, it would be relevant to keep in mind that our country comprises an immense cultural and geographical diversity and our people, nearly a billion and a quarter today, represent multi-religious, multi-lingual and multi-cultural societies whose traditions, customs and socio-religious sensitivities are rooted in thousands of years of recorded history. It is equally important to remember that in our vast and unfettered democracy the unhindered interplay of socio-cultural traditions and religious practices carries the potential of generating discords and disagreements which may lead to serious communal disturbances, particularly when adversary elements from across our borders join the fray.

While it may appear somewhat trite to cite school-level statistics, our security- management apparatus shall need to reckon that we have over 15,000 km of land borders, a coastline of about 7,500 km, over 600 island territories and an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of about 25 lakh sq km. These awesome parameters and, besides, the extremely difficult geographical and climatic conditions which obtain in the various regions of our vast country present serious challenges to our security forces who maintain a constant vigil on our land, sea and air frontiers.

While it would not be feasible to recount the varied security challenges which India has faced in the decades gone by, it could be stated that the more serious problems in the recent years have emanated from Pakistan's continuing proxy war in Jammu and Kashmir; jihadi terrorism, which has been progressively spreading its reach; the destructive activities which the Left-wing extremist groups have been carrying out for decades now; the serious unrest created by the still active insurgencies in the North-East region; and incidents of serious communal violence which have been erupting in the various states, from time to time. Mention must also be made of the steadily growing activities of the Indian Mujahideen, a terror group which has its roots in Pakistan. Another phenomenon, relatively more recent, relates to the emergence of certain radical counter-groups which have been organised with the primary objective of countering the jihadi terror networks. It needs being noted that the activities of such counter-groups have the potential of spreading disharmony and divisiveness which could generate widespread communal violence and result in irreparably damaging the secular fabric of our democracy.

Increased terror activities

The Pak ISI has also been striving to resurrect Sikh militancy in Punjab by supporting the establishment of terror modules from among militants in the Sikh diaspora. The ISI is also reported to have been pressurising Sikh militant groups to join hands with the Kashmir-centric militant outfits. The activities of the Left-wing extremist groups, which have been continuing their armed struggle for the past several decades to capture political power, are posing an extremely serious internal security challenge. While there may have been a marginal decline in the scale of incidents and the number of killings in the past few years, there has been a marked increase in the gruesome attacks by Naxalite groups on the security forces.

India's hinterland continues to remain the prime focus of Pakistan-based terror groups, particularly LeT and IM. In the recent past, indigenous groups comprising elements of SIMI and AL-Ummah have perpetrated serious violent incidents in the country and, notwithstanding its frequent denials, Pakistan remains steadfastly committed to harbouring anti-India terror groups on its soil.

Having referred to some of the more worrying concerns on the homeland front it would be useful to examine whether we have framed an appropriate national security policy and established the required institutions which are capable of effectively meeting the arising threats. Before commenting further on this important issue it would be relevant to keep in view that, as per the provisions in our Constitution, it is the duty of the Union to protect every state against external aggression and internal disturbance.

In the decades past, the country has had to encounter external aggression on several occasions and no significant issues have arisen about the Union's role and responsibility to protect the states against war. However, insofar as the Union's duty to protect every state against internal disturbance is concerned, all the states have not so far accepted the Central Government's authority to enact and enforce federal laws for dealing with terror acts, cyber offences, and other major crimes which have all -India ramifications. The states have also been opposing the Central Government’s authority to establish new security management agencies with pan-India jurisdictions. In this context, an argument which has been repeatedly raised is that it is the constitutional prerogative of the states to manage law and order within their territories and that the Centre has no basis for interfering in this arena.

Undoubtedly, the states are constitutionally mandated to make all required laws in regard to police and public order, take all necessary executive decisions, establish adequate police organisations and manage appropriate security management systems for effectively maintaining law and order within their territories. However, looking back over the serious law-and-order failures which occurred in various parts of the country in the past six-and-a-half decades, it cannot be asserted that there have been no failures and that all the states have a sustained record of ensuring against any breach in the maintenance of peace and security within their jurisdictions.

It may not be practical to detail the varied reasons on account of which the states have failed to timely and adequately deal with arising disturbances in their jurisdictions in the past years. However, it could be briefly said that, among the more significant contributory factors, the defaults of the states have arisen from their failure to maintain adequate Intelligence organisations and well-trained police forces in the required strength for effectively maintaining internal security within their territories. On many occasions, the states have also displayed the lack of political will to deal with an arising situation on their own. Instead, the general practice which has evolved over the past many years has been for the affected state to rush to the Union Home Ministry for the urgent deployment of Central armed police forces for restoring normalcy in the disturbed area.

Another factor which has adversely affected internal security management relates to the progressive erosion of the professionalism of the state police forces. This regrettable decline has taken place because of the day-to-day political interference in the functioning of the constabularies. Such interference has, over the years, caused untold damage and most adversely affected the accountability, morale and the very integrity of the state police forces.

In the annual All-India Internal Security Conferences organised by the Union Home Ministry, many chief ministers have been taking the position that internal security cannot be managed effectively because the states do not have the resources for enlarging and modernising their police and security-related organisations. For the past over two decades now, the Union Home Ministry has been providing annual allocations for the modernisation of the state police forces. However, it is a matter for serious concern that, over the years past, the Central Government has failed to evolve a national security management policy which clearly delineates the respective role and responsibility of the Central and state governments. Nonetheless, whenever called upon to do so, the Central Government has been consistently assisting the states by deploying Central police forces, and even the Army, for restoring normalcy in the disturbed area.

Considering the gravity of the progressively increasing security threats and also bearing in mind the constitutional prescription that it is the duty of the Union to protect every state against internal disturbance, it is important that the Central Government takes the most urgent steps for finalising the National Security Policy and the machinery for its administration, in suitable consultations with the states. The National Security Policy must leave no doubt or uncertainty whatsoever about the Central Government's authority for taking all necessary steps for pre-empting or preventing arising disturbances in any part of the country. In this context, it is regrettable that in the past years the Central Government has not invariably been able to deploy its forces for protecting even its own assets which are located in the various states. The circumstances which led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid, and the grave consequences thereof suffered by the nation, are still far too fresh in our memories to call for any retelling.

Under Article 256 of the Constitution, the executive power of the Union extends to giving of such directions to a state as may appear to the Government of India to be necessary for that purpose. However, over the years, the Union Home Ministry's general approach has been to merely issue cautionary notes and not any directives in regard to an emerging situation. This approach, of sending out advisories, has not proved effective and, over the years, varied internal disturbances have taken place in different parts of the country, some of which have caused large human, economic and other losses.

After the National Security Policy has been finalised, the Central Government shall need to undertake, in collaboration with the states, a country-wide review of the entire existing security management apparatus and draw up a plan for restructuring and revamping it within a stipulated time frame. While playing their part in such an exercise, the states would need to accept the important role which they are required to play in national security management and demonstrate their unconditional commitment to work closely with each other and the Central Government for ensuring against any assault on the unity and integrity of the country.

Ramifications for national security

For the past nearly two decades now, there have been repeated pronouncements that the Central Government is promulgating a law for dealing with identified federal offences and establishing a central agency which would have the authority of taking cognisance and investigating crimes which have serious inter-state or nationwide ramifications for national security. In this context, the proposal of setting up the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) has continued to be debated for the past several years. A number of states, which have been opposed to the establishment of NCTC in its present form, have suggested that the proposed framework of this body should be entirely revised in consultation with the states. Some other states have urged that NCTC should not be established through an executive order but through a law enacted by the Parliament and that it should function under the administrative control of the Union Home Ministry instead of under the Intelligence Bureau.

As terror acts and other federal offences cannot be dealt with by the existing security management apparatus, it is necessary that the Central Government undertakes urgent discussions with the chief ministers to resolve all the doubts and issues raised by the states.

For commencing a purposeful dialogue with the states, with the objective of securing the requisite Centre-states understanding in the arena of national security management, the Union Home Ministry could beneficially utilise the aegis of the Inter-State Council (ISC), of which the Prime Minister is the chairperson.

(To be continued tomorrow)

— Excerpted from the First Air Commodore Jasjit Singh Memorial Lecture on July 18, 2014. The writer, a former Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister, Union Home Secretary and Defence Secretary, is currently Governor of Jammu and Kashmir.

The views expressed in the article are in his personal capacity and not as a representative of government. Send your comments to: nsftribune@tribunemail.com

National Security Forum

This is the first of a two-part series on the urgent need to evolve a holistic approach towards the management of national security. The writer argues that we have to quickly firm up an appropriate national security policy and establish the required institutions to meet the new challenges effectively.

For security sake

The proposal of setting up the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) has continued to be debated for the past several years.

A number of States have been opposed to the establishment of NCTC in its present form.

The states have suggested that the proposed framework of this body should be entirely revised in consultation with them.

As terror acts and other federal offences cannot be dealt with by the existing security management apparatus, it is necessary that the Central Government undertakes urgent discussions with the chief ministers to resolve all the doubts and issues raised by the states.