Abandoning the ‘Army Doctrine’ in Kashmir? : The Tribune India

Join Whatsapp Channel

Abandoning the ‘Army Doctrine’ in Kashmir?

ACCORDING to Kautilya, there are four distinct threats to the State: that which is of external origin and of internal abetment; that which is of internal origin and of external abetment; that which is of external origin and of external abetment; and that which is of internal origin and of internal abetment.

Abandoning the ‘Army Doctrine’ in Kashmir?

The Army Chief Gen Dalbir Singh Suhag on a visit to the Kashmir Valley to review the security situation. PTI



M.G. Devasahayam

ACCORDING to Kautilya, there are four distinct threats to the State: that which is of external origin and of internal abetment; that which is of internal origin and of external abetment; that which is of external origin and of external abetment; and that which is of internal origin and of internal abetment.

Drawing on this wisdom, the Army Doctrine-2004 addresses these threats and defines the role of the Indian Army to deal with them. As per the Doctrine, the Army's primary role is to preserve national interests and safeguard the sovereignty, territorial integrity and unity of India against any external threats by deterrence or by waging war. The secondary role of the Army is to assist government agencies to cope with "proxy war" and other internal threats and provide aid to civil authority when requisitioned for the purpose. Insurgency is the most serious "internal threat" faced by India.

Lest there be any confusion, the Army Doctrine clearly defines "proxy war" and “insurgency”. Proxy war is a war conducted between nations utilising non-state players to fight on their behalf. Insurgency is an organised armed struggle by a section of the local population against the State. The many possible causes of an insurgency include nationalistic, ethnic, linguistic, religious or cultural separatism, poor governance, economic deprivation, corruption, discrimination and oppression.  

The Army Doctrine-2004 triggered a shift in the Army's counter-insurgency operations — from emphasising terrorist casualties, euphemistically called "kills," to not harming an innocent person "even if a terrorist escapes". The Army units were not to be judged on the basis of "kills" but on the basis of feedback from the local population about their behaviour. The success of a commander would be his ability to make a militant surrender. As a practical example, the soldiers would hold their guns downwards and not in a manner to intimidate people. Soldiers will be told as well not to enter settlements at night.

Twelve years down the line, it seems that this Doctrine is sought to be abandoned, at least in Kashmir. In his article, ("Army's task in Kashmir: Restoring order," published in The Tribune on September 15), Lt Gen (retd) Syed Ata Hasnain gives a new twist to the long-dragging counter-insurgency operations in the Valley. According to him, the Army is not restoring law and order but a virtual public order situation which has seen complete paralysis and inability of the police forces to handle. This is the classic situation in which the Army steps in to execute its responsibilities in the realm of operations other than war, hybrid in nature. He wants this task, presently confined to south Kashmir, to be extended to north Kashmir where too there is huge deployment of troops. 

Hasnain wants the Army to resort to maneouvres and strategies normally reserved for military operations. His view is it is not flag marches but the show of force through domination of both the physical and the moral kind and the moral domination of the Army has always been its chief weapon. In all parts of the country, the Army’s arrival to handle law and order is accompanied by a sigh of relief because the people trust it to do the “right thing, the fair thing.” 

Indeed so, provided the engagement is short and sharp and not the decades-long "virtual war" between soldiers and civilians, with the former indiscriminately resorting to the draconian AFSPA. So, the General's hope that Army would achieve "moral domination" in the Kashmir situation is misplaced. Similar is his notion that through such an operation the Army can bolster the morale and functioning of the Rashtriya Rifles, CRPF and the JK police. In fact, it is the reverse that is happening. 

In the event, there is growing apprehension that retired Army top-brass, while spitting venom against civil servants, are not only justifying, but advocating the misuse of the military by the ruling politicians for power games. Is it bullets by the Army against pellets from misguided youth? Is it that while the civil forces responsible for dealing with the situation are allowed to abdicate their role and bloat at the expense of the exchequer, the Army is asked to carry the can?  

The new concept — the Army restoring public order situation and then restoring civil governance — is akin to the Sri Lankan army's advocacy of the “changing role of armed forces from countering insurgency to ‘territorial defence’.” According to this hypothesis, developed after the defeat of the LTTE, counter-insurgency operations would take the form of “territorial defence” of a country, which is vital for its survival. Notably, in Sri Lanka the conflict between the State and the LTTE involved a huge part of its territory, wherein the latter was running a parallel government with law and order, revenue, administration and police systems. In the case of Kashmir, it is a microscopic fraction of the Indian State and the Sri Lankan model is irrelevant there.

It is different if martial law is imposed in the Valley and the military authorities take control of the normal administration, thus removing all power from the previous executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the government. It is usually imposed temporarily when the government or civilian authorities fail to function effectively to maintain order and security, or to provide essential services. 

The Article 34 of the Indian Constitution provides for restriction on rights conferred by Part III (Fundamental Rights) while martial law is in force in any area. But declaration of martial law is obscure and there is no specific provision in the Constitution or any law that authorises the executive or any other authority to declare it. Probably, the Indian armed forces can do it due to vagueness in its declaration procedure as defined by the Indian Constitution. 

However, the ethos and working style of the Indian Army is such that a declaration like this is unlikely to happen. Martial law imposes restrictions and regulations on the fundamental rights and civil liberties of the citizens, and can punish the civilians and even condemn them to death. Though the Supreme Court has held that the declaration of martial law does not ipso facto result in the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, this also could happen. Declaring martial law under Article 34 is different from the promulgation of national Emergency under Article 352.  While the entire country has gone through the rigour and trauma of Emergency (1975-77), declared under Article 352, not even a small area has been put under martial law till now. This is because India's armed forces are defenders of democracy and work in tandem with the executive, legislature and judiciary.

The imposition of martial law in Kashmir by the military is a far cry, it could happen if the political leadership at the top induces the armed forces to do so in conformity with National Security Adviser Ajit Doval's advocacy of a strong-arm strategy because “in the game of power, the ultimate justice lies with the one who is strong.” Is there a move to abandon the "Army Doctrine" in favour of the "Doval Doctrine"? The jury is out. 


The writer is a former IAS officer.

Top News

Cash-strapped Congress gets fresh IT notice of Rs 1,700 crore, say party insiders

Cash-strapped Congress gets fresh I-T notice of Rs 1,700 crore, say party insiders

The Congress is already facing a funds crunch after Income T...

Arvind Kejriwal's wife releases WhatsApp number for people to send messages for jailed AAP leader

Arvind Kejriwal's wife launches WhatsApp campaign to garner support for AAP leader

In a digital media briefing, Sunita says her husband has cha...

High alert across Uttar Pradesh after gangster-turned-politician Mukhtar Ansari's death

High alert across Uttar Pradesh after gangster-turned-politician Mukhtar Ansari's death

Umar Ansari alleged that his father was subjected to slow po...

Mukhtar Ansari was subjected to slow poisoning in jail: Son

Mukhtar Ansari was subjected to slow poisoning in jail: Son

Ansari's post-mortem to be conducted in UP by panel of five ...


Cities

View All