Before giving my views on some aspects of National Security and Conflict Resolution, it is but appropriate that first I pay homage to the late editor of Aakrosh, Maj Gen Afsir Karim, who founded the journal and continued as its editor till he passed away in February this year. Since its inception two decades ago, Aakrosh has been dealing with issues related to terrorism and internal armed conflict under the very able guidance and editorship of Maj Gen Afsir Karim. His passing away has been a grievous loss to India Foundation, but the flame which he lit in starting this journal will forever remain bright and true to the spirit in which the Journal was launched. To General Karim, India Foundation owes a deep debt of gratitude for his sterling contribution in promoting awareness of internal security issues. We will continue to highlight issues and suggest policy interventions that will inform and put issues in a holistic perspective.
Discussions on National Security in India are increasingly finding space in the media and in Universities and think tanks which is a welcome trend. Greater awareness is essential as national security is and always will be of prime concern to the inhabitants of a state and its leadership. But what national security entails is open to different contextual interpretations. Security is being viewed now in terms of not just guarding against threats from external and internal actors, but also through a much larger prism encompassing aspects such as food and water security, energy security, protection of the environment, climate change and the like.
In essence, however, security for the citizens of a state simply means that they can go about their daily work without fear. This would necessitate a secure internal security environment where the citizens can live and work without fear. This would require a vibrant democracy where the voice of the citizens is heard, good governance, a free media and effective justice delivery mechanisms. To protect the country from external forces and to preserve an independent foreign policy, there would be a need to protect the nation’s land and maritime borders, air space, cyberspace and assets in outer space.
The requirement is hence both of a strong military which can address all internal and external security challenges as well as strong institutions of governance within the country, to address internal security concerns and other issues of governance. Allied with this is the need for accountability in all institutions, and transparency in governance.
An important aspect of governance lies in the domain of policy-making. Wrong policies though well intended can have negative consequences for national security. One of the causative factors for conflict in Sri Lanka was the issue of language. To promote unity in the country, the country’s leadership made Sinhala the official language of the country to the exclusion of other languages. This led to resentment amongst the Tamil community and to decades of conflict which could well have been avoided.
But Sri Lanka was not the only country to suffer from the consequences of a flawed policy. Pakistan did likewise too. Soon after independence, in an attempt to forge a national identity based on language, there was an attempt to impose Urdu on the Bengali population of East Pakistan. This led to an effective Bengali language movement in 1948 to counter this decision, which reached its climax in February 1952 leading to the recognition of Bengali as one of the state languages of Pakistan. But the forces set in motion eventually led to the creation of a new state, Bangladesh, in less tax two decades.
India too witnessed a similar churning but was fortunate to have come out of it much better. Here too, an attempt was made to have Hindi as a common language for the country. The riots which broke out in the mid-sixties in Madras over the issue forced the government to declare that English would continue to be used till such time as people wanted it.
Many a time, policy decisions are arrived at on an assumption that uniformity is an essential prerequisite for unity. This is a mistaken notion as the planks of nationhood have to be built on different bonds. Understanding the needs of different sections of society is perhaps the greatest bridge to reconciliation and conflict resolution. Today, India’s tribal heartland is seething because of perceived injustices to them and to their way of life, mainly due to state policies, which have not upheld the interests of the tribal people as enshrined in the Constitution. While serious efforts have been underway, particularly over the last decade or so to address tribal concerns, much more needs to be done to bring peace to the entire area.
With respect to Jammu and Kashmir, mention needs to be made of Articles 370 and 35A of the Constitution, which are applicable to the state. Many analysts have opined that ‘emotional integration’ of the state with the rest of the country is yet to take place. If that be so, then evidently the policies of the state should be made in a manner that facilitates ‘emotional integration’. However, the inclusion of Article 370 in the Constitution, albeit as a temporary provision, has done more harm than good, as it has strengthened the feelings of separateness, at least in the Muslim majority Kashmir Division of the state. The inclusion of Article 35A in February 1954, further added to this feeling. As Article 35A conferred powers to the State Legislature to define who all constituted the permanent residents of the State and to make special provisions for them, the aspect of emotional integration was further eroded. In addition, rights of other communities such as the displaced persons from West Pakistan who were residing there since independence, the Valmiki and Gurkha communities and certain rights of women were suppressed. It is important that ways and means be found to repeal such Articles which have hindered the total integration of the state with the rest of the country.
Conflict resolution also demands effective justice delivery mechanisms. This is applicable to not just insurgencies such as Left Wing Extremism, but to all forms of social unrest. This is still an area of weakness across India, where the process of litigation effectively denies justice through the state’s incapacity to deliver justice in a time bound manner. Besides reforms in India’s police services, there is a drastic need to reform the entire judicial system.
Editorial in Aakrosh, April 2019.
No comments:
Post a Comment