Selection of Chief: Auto-Pilot Route to the Top?

Selection of Chief: Auto-Pilot Route to the Top?

Major General Mrinal Suman

Recent appointment of the Chief of the Army Staff is being criticized by many. Most unfairly, they are terming it as a case of ‘supersession’ or ‘out-of-turn promotion’ or ‘breaching the line of succession’. Their opposition is based on the following grounds:-

* All Army Commanders are equally capable of being the Chief.

* Seniority is sacrosanct and inviolable.

* The government has no right to meddle in the promotions of the army. It is for the army to throw up the senior-most as the prospective Chief.

The above logic is based more on insular sentiments than sound reasoning. Though equally applicable to all the three services, further discussion is being restricted to the army for the ease of analyzing the issue. To start with, it will be in order to recapitulate the existing system of selecting officers for the senior ranks.

Current Process is Highly Flawed

As per the present procedure, all general cadre officers of the rank of Major General are screened by a promotion board for approval for the rank of Lieutenant General (Lt Gen). Once empanelled, they stand in a queue as per their seniority; waiting for the vacancies of Corps Commander to come about. Those with more than three years’ residual service become Corps Commanders. Others, even if more talented are wasted out on staff appointments. Hence, the Corps Commanders are not necessarily the most talented officers of their batch. They were simply lucky – their date of birth matched vacancies. 

   

During 1998-1999, many brilliant Lt Gens failed to get command of Corps due to their unfavorable age-wise placement. Once the government extended retirement age of all service officers by two years, they had three years residual service and became eligible. They rightfully demanded and got appointed as Corps Commanders. This case has been recalled here to demonstrate utter lack of merit in the whole process.

The same flawed process is followed for the appointment of Army Commanders. Once again, they form a queue, hoping and praying that a vacancy comes their way before their residual service falls below two years. No cognizance is taken of their performance as Corps Commanders. Following the same procedure, the senior-most serving Army Commander gets appointed as the Chief.

The above procedure can be equated with ‘auto-pilot ride’ – an army officer is required to prove his competence till he achieves the rank of Lt Gen. Thereafter; he rides auto-pilot and makes career advances purely on account of his seniority and date of birth. If well-placed in the age-seniority queue, any Lt Gen can be the Chief.

An interesting corollary of the above arrangement is that every general cadre officer approved to be Lt Gen is considered capable of being the Chief and, at any given time, there are over 60 such officers. It implies that either the Chief’s job is so pedestrian that it can be performed by a multitude of officers, or, the army is flooded with abundance of talent. No rational organisation can boast of such a claim.

The wisdom of accepting the logic that every Corps Commander is fit to be the Chief is totally absurd. How can the criteria for a Corp Commander and the Chief be the same? A Corps Commander is a field commander of around 30,000 troops whereas a Chief wears multiple hats while heading 1.3 million-strong army. To equate the two appointments is highly untenable.

The current system has another major drawback. It lends itself to manipulation by unscrupulous Chiefs and thus perpetuates a regime of patronage. Every Chief, on assumption of office obtains details of the dates of birth (and thus retirement dates) of senior officers and thereafter, identify prospective officers from his regiment or ilk. Before his tenure ends, he tweaks the system to ensure that the selected protégé is suitably placed and all likely challenges to his advancement are nipped in the bud. In other words, he firmly plants him in the ‘line of succession’.

Earlier such manipulation was done in a discreet manner. Over a period of time, the practice has become so well entrenched that Chiefs have no qualms in openly flaunting their favoritism. In the recent past, one such parochial Chief resorted to unscrupulous means to clear way for his protégé to be the Chief. He found out that along with stalling promotion of other competent contenders to the rank of Lt Gen, he needed to curtail the tenure of a future Chief by a year to ensure top slot for his protégé. As a consequence, the army was saddled with a Chief who knew that he did not deserve to be there.

It is a well known fact that most Chiefs cannot shed their regimental bias. Instead of selecting best talent for higher appointments, their blinkered approach fails to see beyond infantry, armoured corps and artillery loyalties. Chiefs who have benefited from such preferred dispensation feel morally obliged to carry on in the same vein and extend similar benefaction to their regimental subordinates.

Another issue that is commonly overlooked relates to the fixation of individual seniority. Within a batch, inter-se seniority is decided on the basis of the order of merit at the time of passing out from the Indian Military Academy (IMA) and does not change throughout the service career.

There have been numerous cases where highly competent officers failed to pick up appointments of Corps Commanders, Army Commanders and even Chief; just because their course-mates were higher in the merit list prepared at IMA 35 years ago. Thus performance at IMA continues to be the decisive factor for promotion to the higher ranks. Operational service, war experience and demonstrated competence over decades of active career become inconsequential. Can there be a more irrational way of selecting top brass?  

Finally

It should never be forgotten that it is the national government that is responsible for the defence of the country. National security is not an exclusive domain of the services. The armed forces do not exist and function in an insular environment. They are an instrument of the state.

It is for the government to decide how best to discharge its duties of ensuring national security. For that, it has an unalienable prerogative to choose the best talent and it does not need to justify its choice. Fearing accusations of meddling in the internal functioning of the services, the government cannot abdicate its responsibility and allow the services to deprive the nation of the best talent available, that too under a highly specious plea of seniority.

Indian army is riven with regimental factionalism. Senior commanders advance in career but fail to grow up. They never shed their blinkered outlook. The mess created while granting additional vacancies to different arms and services is symptomatic of their narrow-mindedness. To favour their own arm/regiment, they have delivered a terrible blow to the army’s cohesion.

Surprisingly, we appear comfortable with such internal parochialism and no voices are heard against such blatant partisanship. But, when the government exercises its prerogative to select Chief, our hackles go up and we start accusing it of politicization of the army. We call it interference in the internal affairs of the army; as if the army is an exclusive domain, independent of government oversight.

The current system is most unacceptable. The concept of age-seniority based ‘line of succession’ ought to be discarded and replaced by merit based selection by impartial boards for higher ranks in the services. We have had enough of mediocre leadership. Even Army Commanders should be appointed through a diligent selection process.

Finally, two posers:-

* If the system of seniority based promotions is the best, why start so late at the level of Corps Commanders? Why not select/promote Brigade Commanders and Divisional Commanders on the basis of their inter-se seniority? What is good for senior appointments ought to be good for junior appointments as well!

* Agreed that all Corps Commanders are competent but some are brighter than the others. Should the army not get the best leadership? Similarly, all Army Commanders are capable officers and can assume the mantle of heading the army commendably. However, their suitability for the top job will not be identical. Why should the most suitable man not get selected? Why should the second-best leadership be given preference under the illogical plea of seniority?

The current controversy is most unwarranted. Quality of top military brass is too serious a matter to be left to the quirks of seniority. Merit, talent and professionalism should be the sole criteria. The Indian armed forces must throw up the best leadership. We owe it to the nation.*****         

Machiavellian Political Leadership Smells Coup in Kolkata

Machiavellian Political Leadership Smells Coup in Kolkata

Indian political leadership is known to be corrupt and unprincipled; in fact, it is rotten. Their misdemeanours have stopped surprising the countrymen. However, Mamata Banerjee’s charge against the military marks a new low in the sordid saga of political chicanery, falsehood and misrepresentation of facts.

Mamata locked herself up in her office to ‘guard democracy’ for 30 hours. "Don't know what will happen overnight...I will guard democracy...I will continue to be at the Bengal Secretariat till Army at all toll plazas in 18 other districts is withdrawn”, she said. She termed soldiers’ presence at the toll plazas to be akin to a military coup.

Alleging political vendetta, Mamata blamed the centre for trying to bulldoze opponents. Her party averred that soldiers were in toll plazas to counter Mamata's anti-demonetisation stand. Mamata declared that her voice could not be stifled by ‘hatching conspiracy and showing force’. Worse, she accused the army of lying about its intentions and collecting illegal money from the drivers.

True to their character, Kejriwal, Mayawati and Ghulam Nabi Azad joined Mamata’s bandwagon to fault the government. Sample their pearls of wisdom.

Kejriwal – “Mamataji is strongly raising her voice against Modiji’s wrong policies. No army men would have been deployed at the toll plazas in front of West Bengal secretariat if she had praised Modiji. By posting army personnel at the toll plazas, the Centre is trying to intimidate her, but I believe Mamataji isn’t scared of such moves. I just want to tell Mamataji that I and the whole country stand with her. Keep up the fight.”

Mayawati – “This is not correct, our party strongly condemns the move and the central government should not do this. The central government is trying to humiliate Mamata Banerjee as she has been raising her voice against demonetisation. This is unfair to the West Bengal Chief Minister. This step is a grave attack on the constitution. One should not politicise the army.”

Ghulam Nabi Azad – “It seems out of the way. Army doesn’t collect toll? There is no law and order issue in West Bengal for army to be deployed. The centre must clarify it, in fact, PM must clarify as to why state’s rights are being impinged upon,” Azad said

Facts of the Case

All military formations prepare exhaustive logistic plans for mobilisation of forces and their subsequent maintenance during operational emergencies. Logistics pose a huge challenge when war is imminent as time is of utmost importance.

Logistics include concentration of required troops and ordnance at the specified locations expeditiously in the operationally acceptable time frame. To supplement their integral transport resources, the services are allowed to requisition aircrafts, ships, railways and vehicles for logistic support. It is a standard practice the world over: all means of transportation are considered national assets.

In all the wars fought by India, civilian transportation services played a stellar role. Their support was invaluable. Tales of round-the-clock commitment of the railways and the bravery of the civilian truck drivers are legendary. All soldiers hold them in high regard.

To prepare realistic logistic plans, military formations have to have data of the likely number of civilian trucks that would be available for requisition at different locations in the country. For that, a few soldiers are stationed at some selected places to count the number of load carriers crossing those points during a given period.

Based on the data collected, likely availability of load carriers for requisition purposes is deduced and logistic plans made accordingly. To keep logistic plans updated, this exercise is carried out annually in states that impact mobilisation.

The counting exercise is by far the most innocuous and routine affair. A handful of military policemen and soldiers are tasked for the job. Stickers are given to the counted vehicles to avoid repetitive counting of the same vehicle at subsequent checkpoints.  

In the recent case at Kolkatta, the police was duly informed and the checkpoints were jointly sited. Army had suggested 28, 29 and 30 December for data collection but the dates were changed to 01 and 02 December on the advice of the police. Interestingly, similar exercise was done in November 2015 as well. No objections were raised by the state government at that time.

Finally

A military coup is a very serious occurrence. It always proves ruinous to the country and should never be talked about in a flippant and slapdash manner. In any case, coups are not staged by a handful of military police personnel with stickers and notebooks in hand. Tanks and armoured cars patrol the streets to take over centres of power. Moreover, coups aim at usurping absolute power in a country and hence always target the national capital. State capitals in a federal structure need not lose their sleep on that account.  

Mamata Banerjee’s accusations are extremely grave and damaging to the army. One cannot help wondering at the reasons for her behaviour. She appears to have lost her cool and equilibrium. A leader resorts to cheap political stunts only when cornered for lies.

After the army released the letters proving that the police had been duly informed well in advance, she realised that her bluff had been called and lies exposed. In desperation, she has started accusing the soldiers of collecting toll illegally. When asked to produce any proof, she nonchalantly cited media reports. It was a most unfortunate development.

Her intense opposition to demonetisation is well known. Instead of fighting political battles politically, she has converted them into a personal feud. “I’ll die or live but will remove PM Modi from Indian politics,” she declared.

Political frustration or vendetta politics should never harm national institutions. Why drag the army and cast aspersions on its credentials? Political narrative should never be allowed to sink to such abysmal depths that it starts stinking of anti-nationalism.*****

Demonetisation, Opposition and Bandh

Demonetisation, Opposition and Bandh

Major General Mrinal Suman

Life is full of surprises, nay shocks. When Manmohan Singh slammed demonetisation as ‘organised loot and legalised plunder’, one did not know how to react. The man who facilitated generation of maximum black money was accusing Modi government of ‘monumental mismanagement’ – some brazenness!

Manmohan Singh virtually pawned national assets to the coalition partners in exchange for the prime ministerial chair. He allowed and abetted open loot of the treasury.  Ministries like coal, telecommunication, aviation, railway and sports had become dens of corruption. He expressed his helplessness, taking shelter under the unscrupulous plea of coalition compulsions. In a way, it was an open admission by him that he would lose his chair if he took action against his corrupt colleagues. Therefore, it was most incongruous for him to talk of loot and plunder.

One does not know why the Congress party fielded him. Did it really think he was their trump card, being a renowned economist and an ex Prime Minister, or was it done in jest to embarrass him? More surprising is the fact that he agreed to speak on the subject. He made a laughing stock of himself with his homilies, inviting sniggers from viewers. His track record both as the head of the government and pragmatic economist is appalling.

Congress party appears to be at its wits’ end. It does not know how to respond to Modi’s initiatives. The party joined the whole country in lauding surgical strikes across LoC. When it realised that Modi was gaining popularity, it started questioning its occurrence. Most ridiculously, it demanded that proof be made public. When scoffed at by the whole country, it started claiming that it had also allowed similar strikes when in power.

Demonetisation evoked similar response. Initial reaction was muted. However, with Modi acquiring iconic status as a crusader against black money, Congress quickly changed tracks. Having failed to find a convincing economic argument against demonetisation, it has started resorting to the dishonourable tactic of disrupting parliamentary proceedings.

Most laughingly, Congress has declined to debate the issue without the presence of the Prime Minister. Yes, it is not satisfied with just a statement from him but wants his presence throughout the debate – an unprecedented and irrational demand.  A new low has been reached in India’s abysmal parliamentary conduct – issues are not important, individuals are. It shows total bankruptcy of ideas and logical thinking.

Taking a cue from the Congress party, other opposition parties have also joined the bandwagon of protests and bandhs. They are expressing their Aakrosh (anger), ostensibly for the discomfort being caused to the common man. Can there be a more ridiculous excuse? Actually, it is the political leadership that is getting discomfited. 

Common man is supporting the decision and is willingly enduring the temporary hardship for the long-term good of the nation. People standing in long queues for hours showed no anger at all. Even leading questions of some infamously shameless media men have failed to evoke negative responses.

Responses sought by Modi on his app showed overwhelming support for the step. True to its wont, opposition dismissed it as a contrived poll.  

A survey was carried out by C-Voter (an international polling agency) across different age and income groups on 21 November. It covered nearly half the country’s parliamentary constituencies. Almost 87 percent of respondents supported the move against black money while 85 percent opined that the inconvenience being faced by them was worth the effort. Therefore, which common man’s discomfort is bothering the opposition parties?

Even if the above survey is dismissed as non-representative, how do the opposition parties explain sweeping victories scored by the ruling party in the recent civic elections in Maharashtra and Gujarat? These were held after demonetisation and people had already endured cash difficulties.

The truth is obvious to all. Elections are an expensive business. Political parties had hoarded huge stocks of ill-gotten cash to fight elections and bribe voters. They are feeling ‘cheated’ and their anger is explicable. How will they arrange liquor and other freebies to influence voters? How will they gather supporters for their rallies? Who will pay for the fleets of buses for transporting them, arrange their meals and cash rewards? Hiring of helicopter fleets and cavalcades of vehicles for flitting across various constituencies will become difficult.

Many political parties used to collect huge funds by auctioning party tickets for elections to the highest bidders. Needless to say, such donations were always in cash. Demonetisation has dealt a fatal blow to this trafficking of electoral rectitude. As there is no cash, there are no takers. Any wonder then that many political leaders are shrieking and behaving in such a despicable manner. Their treasure chests have been demolished.  

In addition to the politicians; some builders, traders, smugglers, hawala operators, presstitutes, lawyers, doctors, private hospitable, schools/colleges and such other segments of the society have also been thriving on black money. Therefore, their opposition to demonetisation is understandable.

However, what is not acceptable is their incendiary and inciting agenda. Old pictures of long queues (including those outside cinema halls) are being circulated as of cash starved restless crowds. Every unfortunate death anywhere in the vicinity of a bank/ATM is being attributed to demonetisation. A heart patient died at home while getting dressed for going to the bank. The headline read, “Man dies of fear of long wait at the bank”. Absurdity has no limits.

According to jurisprudence, all decisions taken in good faith must be accepted accordingly. Everyone knows that demonetisation is a colossal step towards ridding India of the menace of black money. The whole country is supporting the government. Exceptions are only two – those who thrived on black money and those who are inimical to Indian interests. As regards the latter, they are incorrigible. Anti-nationalism is a part of their DNA. Every progressive step towards a better India has to be opposed by them; and that is India’s misfortune.*****

Demonetisation, Corruption and the Aftermath

Demonetisation, Corruption and the Aftermath

Major General Mrinal Suman

Black money has been an integral part of the Indian narrative. Pervading environment of corruption is invariably faulted for all the ills afflicting India. Surprise demonetisation of high value currency notes has been hailed as a radical step against black money and corruption in India. Will demonetisation succeed in curbing corruption? Optimists are confident while the doomsayers are sceptical.

In the simplest terms, corruption is unethical conduct by a person in authority. Anyone who misuses the authority entrusted to him for personal gains is guilty of resorting to corrupt practices.

Authority vested in a person may be governmental or non-governmental. Undoubtedly, governmental corruption has much wider and graver implications; both in range and quantum – from an office peon expecting tip for moving a file to the top official demanding percentage cut for dispensing favours. Bribes are passed on in a number of clever ways. For example, it is a common sight to see bribe givers intentionally losing huge sums to the bribe takers in pre-Diwali flash sessions.  

Personal gains are not limited to financial exchanges. They could be in terms of getting expensive gifts at children’s weddings, a flat from a builder at subsidised prices, fully paid overseas jaunts, foreign scholarship for the progeny and even donations to the family-run trusts. While dealing with foreign nations, green cards for the offspring are an irresistible attraction.

Corruption can take many other forms as well. Many consider Dr Manmohan Singh to be the most corrupt Prime Minister of India. Coalition parties realised his unabashed lust for power. They bribed him with the prime ministerial chair; in return, they got a licence to loot the nation. Civil aviation, food, coal, communications and other ministries were subjected to open plunder. It was a pure quid pro quo arrangement – corruption at its worst.

Likely Impact of Demonetisation

Corruption is of two types – collusive and coercive. Collusive corruption is generally not talked about much as both parties are comfortable with it. Paying a small amount to a conductor for a berth in a train suits everyone. A contractor does not mind paying a mutually agreed sum to officials for getting unauthorised deviations. A judge may agree to acquit an accused for a fee. A tax evader may willingly give a few lakhs to the appellate tax authority rather than pay huge amounts of penalties to the exchequer.

Ingeniously, collusive corruption is referred to as speed money, convenience fee, facilitation expenses or departmental overheads. The bribe giver willingly offers gratuity to the official for out-of-turn favour. Many businesses thrive on such dealings. No one complains.

Demonetisation may not be able to rule out collusive corruption as it is a win-win situation for both the bribe giver and the bribe taker.

It is the coercive corruption that is resented by all. Herein the bribe giver feels coerced to offer bribe to get his entitled dues. And, he begrudges it. When a builder is forced to shell out money under the table to the authorities for getting his fully-compliant building plans passed, he feels wronged. When the provident fund officials demand cut to release an employee’s hard earned savings, he curses the system. Therefore, coercive corruption has become the real fall guy in India. 

In some cases, collusive corruption acquires coercive overtones subsequently, resulting in open spats. For example, all bidders for major contracts are told the percentage they should factor in for the department’s cut. Bidders comply willingly. The problem starts when they are asked to pay more than what had been catered for. Excess demand could either be due to the arrival of new officials or a change in the ruling party. Contractors cannot oblige. Consequently, either they abandon the contract midway or compromise on quality. That is why we see stalled projects and collapsed bridges.

Demonetisation is likely to curb coercive corruption considerably. Lack of hoarded currency will act as a great impediment. 

The Political Corruption

Political corruption is India’s bane. It is collusive in nature. All political parties resort to bribing voters through different means. Government coffers are emptied out to distribute freebies (cycles, laptops, sarees and so on). Loans are waived. Farmers are given free electricity. Unauthorised colonies are regularised. Agricultural income, even of rich landlords, is kept tax-free. Liquor is distributed openly. Currency notes are delivered to the voters through innovative way.

Sadly, most voters fall for such free goodies and tall promises. Kejriwal promised everything free to the Delhi voters and they voted for him.

An incident that this writer witnessed in 1999 is symptomatic of the extent to which political corruption has afflicted India. A local MLA of an eastern state was being pestered by a noisy crowd for not constructing the promised road to their village. “We gave you votes. Fulfil your promise”, they chanted. When his pleas failed to mollify the crowd, the MLA lost patience and shouted back, “You did no favour. I gave every voter a bottle of hooch, one thousand rupees and a blanket. I owe you nothing. Get Lost.” Knowing the statement to be true, the crowd started dispersing, albeit grumblingly.

Most interestingly, even after the above episode, the said MLA has been getting re-elected from the same constituency on the same set of promises. Undoubtedly, the value of free goodies would have gone up with every election. The much promised road is nowhere in sight. This is the normal narrative of political corruption in India.

Will demonetisation help curb corruption? If the violent reaction of the opposition parties is any indication, it will certainly help. Parties have amassed thousands of crores in cash to buy votes. They are feeling aggrieved as their treasures have become worthless.  Will politicians find another way of buying votes? With their proverbial penchant for resorting to corrupt activities, no one can be sure.  

When Heavens are Roped-in

Human ingenuity has no limits – even heavens are not spared. Attempts are made to corrupt gods as well. By sharing a part of the corrupt earnings with gods, divine shield is sought against the heaven’s wraths and the long arm of the law. Duly placated gods are expected to protect corrupt devotees.

Significantly, propitiatory corruption is purgatorial in nature and not penitential. There is no remorse.  Such an offering becomes a conscience cleansing act and flushes out all feelings of guilt. All places of worship flourish on tainted money. Propitiatory donations include expensive diamonds, precious stones, gold, silver and wads of currency notes.

As offerings of honest devotees can barely meet their routine maintenance expenses, demonetisation will certainly deprive the religious places of large donations by the corrupt. 

In a lighter vein, perhaps the most interesting and common form of collusive corruption relates to Mannat (vow to a deity). Deity’s intervention is sought for favourable outcome of an important issue. In return, the deity is promised a visit (pilgrimage), donation, consecration or any other votive. It is made very clear to the deity that the offer is purely on ‘no success: no votive’ basis, thereby hoping that the deity would be forced to intercede to retain credibility.

Needless to say, demonetisation will have little impact on Mannats as the government has no role to play in a matter that concerns humans and their gods.

Finally 

       

In a survey carried out by a leading newspaper, 81 percent respondents termed demonetisation to be a ‘good idea well executed’; 15 percent called it a ‘good idea badly executed’; and only 4 percent opposed the step.

Two posts on WhatsApp put the entire issue in an honest and objective perspective.  When queried, a veteran in a queue at a bank said – “If I can stand for hours at Balaji for one minute darshan without any assurance of divine support, I can surely stand here knowing well that demonetisation will help my country”.

Similarly, a young man at an ATM declared – “I spend hours outside the booking window to get tickets for the first show of popular movies. Wait of a few hours here to curb black money is no big issue”.  

     

If Kejriwal, Mamta, Yechuri, Mayawati and leaders of the ilk oppose any change, the change must be considered good for the nation. This litmus test applies to demonetisation as well. All opposition leaders are crying wolf and shedding crocodile tears – faulting the government on the grounds of inconvenience to the public and the trade. That is all hogwash. It is the loss of hoarded cash chests that is hurting them immensely and they are writhing in electoral dilemma – how to bribe voters to win elections.***** 

Implosion is the only Cure for Cancer-Afflicted Pakistan

Implosion is the only Cure for Cancer-Afflicted Pakistan

Major General Mrinal Suman

It is India’s great misfortune that it has been cursed with a neighbour like Pakistan. A nation born out of hatred needs hatred for its continued sustenance. Over a period of time, like a cancerous tumour, hatred for India has made deep inroads into Pakistan’s national psyche. It has been devouring its vitals, hurling it into the abyss of a failed state. In its obsession to harm India, Pakistan has chosen the path of self-destruction.

All nations have certain core values like ensuring safety, wellbeing and health of their citizens. Unfortunately, Pakistan’s core values are negative in nature. They are based on the sole principle of ‘hate and hurt India’. Due to decades of indoctrination and brainwashing, most Pakistanis suffer from an extremely brutal, sadistic and vicious anti-Indian streak.

One may not fully agree with former Australian Test umpire Darrell Hair’s description of the Pakistani cricketers as ‘cheats, frauds and liars’. But the fact is that the whole world considers Pakistan to be an untrustworthy and deceitful nation. Pakistan has made duplicity to be its national policy. Treachery is in Pak DNA. Quite rightly, the whole world considers Pakistan to be a rogue state.

Independent Pakistan started its track record with treachery. Despite having signed a ‘stand-still agreement’ with the state of Jammu and Kashmir, it unleashed raiders on the hapless Kashmir valley. In April 1965, it launched a surprise attack on Kutch. Later that year, it infiltrated its forces into Kashmir, expecting a local uprising against India. It also provided sanctuaries to underground elements of North-Eastern India. After its defeat in 1971, Pakistan has been exporting terror to India in every possible manner.

LOC has always been a hotbed of Pakistan’s nefarious activities. Recent attack on Uri and India’s strong response through surgical strikes has reignited the conflict. Both sides have been resorting to intense fire. Border villages are suffering acute damage. This fire-fight has the potential to get more confrontational.  

‘Be patient with a bad neighbour: he may move’ is a famous Egyptian proverb. Unfortunately, such hopes cannot be entertained with respect to a bad neighbouring country. India has to live and deal with Pakistan; but how? What are India’s options?

Option 1: Seek Peace through Mollycoddling Pakistan

A small but vociferous segment is of the view that India, being a bigger nation, should act in a more generous manner to assure Pakistan of Indian sincerity in resolving contentious issues. It suggests demilitarization of Siachen. As Pakistan has no presence on the glacier, demilitarization implies ‘unilateral vacation of Siachen by India’. It is opined that such a gesture will bring about a reduction in Pakistan’s hostility towards India. Some go to the extent of suggesting that India should resolve the Kashmir tangle to Pak satisfaction. Similar arguments are put forward by the enthusiasts of Track-II diplomacy and initiatives like ‘Aman Ki Asha’.

Advocates of this soft option are those influential Indians who have been cultivated by Pakistan through what is commonly referred to as ‘biryani diplomacy’. They are frequently taken on fully-paid trips to exotic locales the world over, ostensibly for seminars and group discussions. Lavish hospitality generates bonhomie. Soon, they start echoing Pak stance to mislead the Indian public.

Many advocate stronger cultural ties with Pakistan. Shah Rukh Khan feels that ‘politics between the two countries should be handled by the politicians.....creative people have nothing to do with it’. Gavaskar is of the view that recommencement of Indo-Pak matches will help better relations. He does not want sports to be mixed with politics. Sponsors of Ghulam Ali’s concerts claim that music has no boundaries. Sadly, in their greed for monetary gains, they forget that Pakistan is waging a war against India and killing Indians. It is not playing any politics.

Over the last seven decades India has taken various initiatives to make Pakistan see the benefits of a rancor-free relationship. Every Indian Prime Minister has made liberal conciliatory gestures. Ceasefire in 1948, return of Haji Pir Pass, repatriation of 96,000 PoWs under the Simla Agreement and grant of MFN status are some of them. All failed.

While the Indian leadership was trying to break ice through the ‘bus diplomacy’ in 1998-99, Pakistani military was busy planning the notorious Kargil incursion. Modi’s out-of-the-box gesture of birthday stop-over at Lahore was followed by a fierce terrorist strike at the Pathankot airfield. Disappointingly, Pakistan remains incorrigible as a devious and cunning neighbour.

Expecting a change of heart is nothing but self-delusion. Issues like Kashmir and Siachen are merely a manifestation of Pakistan’s infinite hostility towards India. Were India to hand over Kashmir to it on a platter and withdraw from Siachen, Pakistan will invent newer issues to keep the pot boiling.

Option 2: Persist with the Current Policy

An influential section of the India intelligentsia wants the current policy to continue. It finds no need for a change. Editorial in a leading Indian daily read, “Since 1990 India has had a consistent policy towards Pakistan: ‘Let them hit us with whatever they can, we will harden our defences but not retaliate in kind’.” According to the editor, the said policy has been ‘remarkably successful’.

Since 1990, Kashmir has seen a loss of nearly 50,000 lives, including civilians and security/police personnel. The insensitive editor had the impudence to declare that the policy of no retaliation has been successful.

Indian security forces have captured a huge cache of Pak-supplied weapons from the terrorists in the last 15 years. It includes more than 34,000 AK 47 rifles, 5000 grenade launchers, 90 machine guns, 12,000 revolvers, 350 missile launchers, 100,000 grenades and 63,000 kg explosive. Even anti-tank and anti-aircraft guns have also been seized.

Continuance of the current policy of enduring Pak aggression without riposte is proving highly expensive in human lives and expenditure. India’s over-indulgence and conciliatory gestures have emboldened Pakistan into considering India to be a soft state. It has increased its intransigence and hardened its anti-India attitude.

Option 3: Isolate and Disintegrate Pakistan

Devious countries like Pakistan do not believe in international conventions and shamelessly flout them. The only language they understand is of strength and retribution.

In the short term, India must make it amply clear to Pak government that every anti-India mischief would invite immediate reprisal and that no transgression will go unpunished. In addition, diplomatic relations should be downgraded. All concessions like MFN should be withdrawn. Rail and road contacts should be suspended. There can be no cultural ties with a country that is waging a war against India.

However, India’s long term objective should be to isolate Pakistan internationally and trigger its disintegration. Isolation of Pakistan will not pose a major challenge. Pakistan has already acquired notoriety as the prime breeding ground of terrorism in the world. Pakistanis are looked at with suspicion the world over. Consequently, most hide their true identity and pretend to be from India. A proactive policy should be followed to make friends with the countries who feel threatened by the growth of terrorism in Pakistan. 

Leveraging its enormous economic clout, India must make it clear to the world that any nation that supports Pakistan’s anti-Indian policies cannot claim to be India’s friend. Using its formidable influence, India should have Pakistan expelled from the cricketing world. If South Africa could be debarred for apartheid, why should Pakistan not be banned for promoting terrorism? As cricket is a national obsession, it will hit Pakistani psyche hard.

Raising the Balochistan issue was a master stroke and a game changer. If Pakistan can cultivate a Kashmiri separatist constituency within India, India can cultivate a separatist Baloch constituency in Pakistan. If Pakistan can dedicate its Independence Day to Kashmir, India can dedicate its Independence Day to Balochistan, Gilgit, Baltistan, and PoK.

Expectedly, the world at large has displayed great understanding of India’s stand. Not a single country has faulted India for its statement on Balochistan. India should also support independence of other provinces like Sind. Pakistan must be splintered into as many countries as possible. The aim should be to reduce Pakistan to its current Punjab Province only.

Therefore

Peace is a two-way process. Both parties have to desire it. India cannot be friends unilaterally while Pakistan pursues a path of vicious hostility. Pakistan was created on the ideology that the ‘pure’ cannot coexist with the infidel; it is naïve to expect Pakistan to have a change of heart. If Pakistan adopts a conciliatory stance, it would amount to negating the two-nation theory, the raison d'être for its very creation.

It is time India stops living in a fool’s paradise. Pakistan will always be a devious and cunning neighbour. It should never be forgotten that deceit, betrayal, duplicity and perfidy are synonym with Pakistan. Therefore, it will be in India’s interests to get reconciled to an antagonistic Pakistan and tailor its approach accordingly.

In world affairs, timidity is considered a sign of impotence and not sagacity. Rogue states like Pakistan understand the language of retribution only. Having failed to make Pakistan see benefits of a rancour-free relationship, India has no reason to be apologetic.

India should stop claiming that a united Pakistan is in India’s interests. There cannot be a more blinkered view. Its break-up is a necessity for the peace and progress of the region. Surgery is generally considered to be ultimate course of treatment for fatal tumours. Malignancy afflicted Pakistan is no exception. India must help trigger the required implosion. *****