INDIA’S POOR NEED DIGNITY and NOT CHARITY

            (This post too was written on Facebook when my blog was inaccessible)

Competition among major political parties to promise regularisation of unauthorised colonies in Delhi may appear very laudable. Of course, all INDIAN citizens must have a decent roof on their head, along with access to nutrition, sanitation, healthcare, education and employment that guarantee both economic security and legitimate opportunities to better their plight.

These must not be treated as acts of charity or altruism but fundamental necessities for a stronger India. Only healthy and happy people can make a state, society and civilisation great. They can produce more wealth, generate powerful ideas and collaborate better among themselves.

We need a pool of physically healthy, mentally strong and intelligent, technically skilled and professionally honest citizens for making good soldiers, good industrial workers or corporate leaders or Journalists or civil servants or Politicians or even Farmers out of them. A good state and civilisation cannot leave its people on mercy of invisible forces. A welfare state with sturdy governance has been the foundation for a strong state and vibrant society through out human history. We need it all the more in the current world, which is far more complex.

A small section of genuine politicians across party line have contributed to some advancement in this direction in post-colonial India. But the colonial mindset of most post colonial rulers has always been visible.

Regularising unauthorised colonies is neither appropriate nor a sufficient solution to the problems. It amounts to mocking miseries of not merely few poor but that of the entire society. Our political class appears as a vulture thriving on insecurities, anxieties and vulnerabilities of people. They also seem determined to make dishonest people out of our citizenry in pursuit of their partisan ambitions.

Such moves have also been used in the past to grab some of the prime land in the heart of national capital by land sharks masquerading as Politicians. Help to poor has only been a pretext. Sadly, poor have been made partners in such crime.

People must get their rights through proper and transparent means. We need a suitable governance vision and mechanism to address these issues. These must not be matters of discretion or desire of political class.

Supreme Court must ban such poll promises and direct state to provide both suitable housing and job to every INDIAN, along with access to healthcare and education within the next 2-3 or 5 years like a fundamental right. Ironically, our governance structures and political system, in the current form, are incapable of addressing such governance needs.

But the current political, corporate and even bureaucratic class of leaders, like our colonial masters, seem to be so blinded by their own lust for their privileged position that they do not mind pulverising and decimating India as a civilisation and state. We must not invoke our ancient values for partisan political gains only.

Ironically, both Confucius and Kautilya had emphasised that the primary responsibility of a ruler is to build virtues (through observance of Svadharma as outlined by the latter) among citizenry. Such governance principles had provided a sturdier foundation for
material prosperity and scientific advancement of these two great civilisations. They were not perfect but certainly better than their contemporaries.

People in leadership roles in every sector need to be role models for the masses. Laws and courts can tackle a few deviants but these
Institutions too would be helpless if the onslaught on wider social values are so rampant.

Neither the hungry, unhealthy, insecure and anxious nor the greedy and arrogant can ever be virtuous. They can never form healthy and harmonious society. And the people centric governance has to address these twin challenges.

A little bit of land grabbing and evasion of real governance issues may appear innocuous to some. But it reflects a larger bankruptcy of the existing political system and outlook. Hope some sanity dawns and our so-called leaders seek to find a solution and not exploit problems for partisan gains.

DEFICIENT SOCIAL TRUST: PITFALL OF A CLOSED SYSTEM?

(This is yet another post written on Facebook on same day when Dr Wenliang died)

Chinese social media has been witnessing unprecedented levels of grief and anger over death of a young Chinese Doctor Li Wenliang early this morning. Wenliang had been arrested on charges of spreading rumour over his sincere efforts to warn about impending corona virus pandemic as early as on December 30th. He had apparently contacted the virus while attending an infected patient who was unaware of it. People believe that timely action on warnings of the deceased Doctor could have contained the corona outbreak much better. But he was humiliated and eventually paid with his life for his integrity and sincerity.

Many Chinese people have commented in various words that ‘liars and cronies were hailed as hero whereas an honest Good Samaritan was persecuted’. Does it happen only in totalitarian systems? Probably, declining and degenerating democracies could be similar or even worse.

The issue highlights how even a mighty state like China and its people are vulnerable in absence of a trust based society and transparent governance. One innocuous repression of intelligence and integrity can invite large scale disaster for all.

Of course, people need to be responsible in their utterances. But genuine mistakes in any sincere expression of opinion or facts must not invite retribution.

A democracy like India has been routinely witnessing repression of merit and verbal wars in the name of public discourses with lavish use of lies, deception and hateful propaganda. These are assault on Indian state, society and civilisation as these impede ability of people to excel and foster collaboration to optimise their collective strength. Democracy sounds hollow and hypocritical in absence of individual integrity and social harmony.

INDIAN society and civilisation had thrived in the past by its ability to create a trust based society where individual integrity fostered both excellence and stronger social bonds. It was decadence and decay, though not complete, that led to their ruination and pulverisation at the hands of barbaric savages during medieval era, which has been universally described as the dark age on the subcontinent. It had failed to promote science, knowledge and rationality as well as larger social harmony and dignity of individuals that India as a civilisation had boasted of, much before the rest of the world. When Europe witnessed Renaissance, we were plummeting to depths of perversion at the altar of debauchery, repression and eventually colonial plunder, with of course energised resistances from several quarters.

We need to learn lessons from the past but not get trapped into it. It can only take us down. It is not the identity but the values that matter. It is irrelevant whether overwhelming majority of people on the subcontinent converted to Islam out of fear or on volition. It is also a fact that invaders did not bring great civilisational virtues or stronger scientific values. It was purely failure of an inward looking, stratified and decaying India to civilise, and not convert, areas beyond the subcontinent that sent marauder and barbaric to plunder and pillage. We need to learn lessons in security and governance and not politically encash it.

None of the oppressive or even the so-called hardline protagonists of Islam on the subcontinent have adhered to the Humanist and egalitarian values that the Holy Prophet of Islam had tried to preach in his context. His values and ideals were decimated and hijacked soon after his death, which was manifest in killing and humiliation of his own descendants, including many women and children at Karbala. Islam became a pretext for loot, murder, plunder, pillage and rape, something that the Holy prophet of Islam had tried to resist and eliminate. And surprisingly in India, Islam discovered a humanist strand of Sufism and sought to discover and revive some of the real teachings of Holy prophet, which are more in sync with Upanishadic teachings that were reiterated by Lord Buddha.

Oppression, fear and hatred can never get the best out of any people and society, especially in a heterogeneous India. For the sake of rise of India, our democracy must avoid a return to medieval era mindset. Social harmony and social trust as manifest in some of the eternal values of pre-caste era of the ancient civilisation of the subcontinent are critical for a stronger India. These alone can contribute to a more harmonious world and not the “shop keepers model of representative government” founded on colonial plunder and pillage of the entire world, despite some brilliant innovations and practices perfected in recent centuries.

The entire integrated, interconnected and a somewhat leaderless world needs original INDIAN values more badly at this juncture. We cannot and must not go back in time. But fusion of modern Democracy with Kautilyan principles of governance, Buddhist notion of Dharma and Confucian principles of harmony can enrich and secure the world beyond all expectations and imaginations.

At the same time our alternative to extremism must not be corruption, perversion and yet another form of decadence or perversion symbolised by dynastic political syndicates. Sadly, they have been masquerading as political entities and thriving on subversion of governance, society and state. Probably Indians and the world need resurgence of civilisational values of original India and not the resurrection of decadent identity clashes of the medieval era.

Reform in Political Parties and Private Sector Would Be Critical for a Stronger India

     

 On January 19, I had the privilege of being part of discussion/talks at my alma mater JNU along with two very distinguished fellow alumni: Maj Gen (Rtd) GC Dwivedi, a 71 war veteran and now a highly accomplished academic, and an equally eminent and accomplished veteran journalist Shri Ajit Jha. Details were shared on Facebook by my friend Rajesh Kumar. 

   We discussed inherent strengths of civilisational values of India that have helped sustain democracy even amidst all forms of adversity and constraints. These values were revived by Mahatma Gandhi, who was probably the greatest mobilizer of people as well as an original humanist thinker after Lord Buddha on this subcontinent. We thoroughly discussed some of the key strengths and vulnerabilities of current Indian state and society. We also attempted to identify governance-security challenges and priorities of India in the contemporary era in presence of an enlightened audience. It was an extremely stimulating and vibrant session.

I had maintained that a country of India's size cannot afford to depend upon individual brilliance of a few.  We needed serious and sustained institutional reforms to not only synergise individual and institutional values, goals, orientation and interests in every sector but also among the institutions as well as between them and the larger society. The principles of fairer and healthy competition were critical for promoting individual initiative, industry and enterprise, which formed the core of democratic freedom at one hand and accelerated advancement of people on the other. 

I emphasized that we needed to overhaul entire criminal justice system, healthcare, education, R&D capacity along with civil service to make these competitive and professional, but the most critical area in which Indian democracy needed to take initiative were reform in political parties, corporate sector and media. These cannot afford to be controlled by self-seeking cliques. Political parties needed to be cohesive platforms  with appropriate structures for debate, discussion and avenues for entry and exit at different leadership roles. Political parties cannot afford to act as brokerage syndicates that had to subvert rule of law and integrity of governance for their sheer survival. 

Similarly, our corporate sector, notwithstanding all their virtues and some of the outstanding visionary leaders it had produced, needed come out of Sukhi Lala mode as portrayed in iconic Mother India movie of 1950s. They needed assert their credentials as legitimate stakeholders in governance rather being at the mercy of profit driven mercenaries lacking any sense of larger social commitment. There was certainly need to beyond emotions in pursuit of nationalism and national security.

Of course the other two speakers are very well known and they have been in public domain for too long and their views are very well known. 

 I am sharing some photographs for my friends.

+3

ALLUREMENT OF QUOTAS: A SMOKESCREEN TO DENY DIGNITY AND ECONOMIC SECURITY TO ALL?

(Following is a post that I had written on Facebook. I was struggling to access my own blog due to suspected malice of some powerful cyber criminals) 

            Supreme Court’s recent observation that quotas are not part of fundamental rights deserves commendation. But the court should have gone on to declare that the access to high quality education along with jobs that provide basic level of economic security and dignity must be made fundamental rights. These have been part of directive principles for too Long.

        Caste based employment reservations must have been a necessity as an interim measure when the country gained independence. But their continuation even after seven decades has only perpetuated divides and fractured our social cohesion.

      It is not about government jobs but the negative impact on governance capacity of our democracy. It has encouraged political elite to abdicate their responsibilities towards universal access to education, health-care and employment. These are most critical vehicles for securing collective empowerment of India.

      It suits our rogue elite if people remain vulnerable in absence of rule of law. A hostile and corrupt government system will push them to caste based cliques even for defence of their basic rights. On the other hand, mighty and powerful can exploit bad governance to escape the clutches of law. Emotional identity divide can be a smart tool to destroy governance and popular accountability.

      Such phenomenon has encouraged rogues and crook to hijack our democracy. They can plunder and pillage the country being fully assured that a divided people shall struggle to demand transparency and integrity in governance. Their mind can be numbed by emotive identity divide. They would lose capacity to think rationally or judge and evaluate their representatives on the basis of their performance.

     A divided society and a divided house are certain to decay and degenerate. These can vitiate the larger ecosystem, obstructing merit and talent from flourishing. Under such conditions, people can never excel collectively or live in harmony.

      Sadly, we refuse to take lesson from our under performance as a society and state. We are no longer shaken by the expanding all round asymmetry (five times and growing) with our northern neighbour China that was equal to us until four decades back. It has nothing to do with the so called inferiority of democracy. It is more an outcome of subversion of governance systems.

      It has been scientifically established that Caste in India was originally not a hereditary phenomenon. It were greedy and dishonest elite that made it hereditary, oppressive and discriminatory. Once a society decays, degenerates and gets enslaved, it’s elite further lose their moral compass. Many become self seeking compradores to any power or authority that can protect their privileges. They do so at the cost of their own society. They oppress their own people and especially the down trodden. It was irrationality of a decadent elite of a Subjugated India that made the caste system so oppressive and cruel.

But it is time to move forward and do away with the very phenomenon of the Caste. It has to be abolished forever and not exploited for political rent. Following are some of the pertinent questions that every Indian must pose to himself or herself: 

Why, and how long, should an independent India remain shackled in a subservient mindset? 

Shouldn’t we move towards universal and equitable access to security and dignity?

 Why should some of us be hoodwinked in the name of quota and made collaborators in denigration of India? 

How long can we afford to fall prey to divide and rule trick of rulers? 

Why should housing, Jobs, healthcare, education and employment not be made accessible to all? 

Why should a bunch of parasitic forces relish mass anxieties and insecurities to exploit and thrive on these? 

Why should we be divided as a people and our civilization destroyed at the altar of political opportunism?

Doesn’t patriotism warrant the country getting precedence over politics?

Without solidarity and larger harmony among people as well as larger integrity, how can we work collectively? 

An Impartial and Apolitical Perspective on CAA

Yesterday, a journalist friend caught me virtually unguarded with a few questions. So far, I had avoided speaking anything on CAA and NRC. But journalists are smart people. They know how to draw you into an area of their own interest.

As a life long student and former practitioner of national security, I look at issues differently. I believe that on key issues of national security, the Government and the opposition, as well as civil society and even media, should be on same page.

Sustained protests and violence are doing a lot of harm to the country. These should have been avoided and everything should be done even now to stop these. Protests are part of democracy, but those destroying public property, deserve severest punishment. Those police personnel, abusing their power to torment innocent citizens should get rather more stringent punishment as they are expected to protect people and uphold law.

Hindus, Sikhs, Christians and Buddhists etc have faced the most brutal and inhuman persecution in 3 countries listed in the CAA. Their women have been regularly raped and violated, their properties are captured. their places of worship are desecrated and many of them are regularly framed in fake cases. Human Rights groups headed by Muslims in those countries have highlighted these.

No influential Indian has earlier paid serious attention to plight of these people. They have been strategically irrelevant for the West. Hence, it has been unfashionable for a large section of Indian elite to talk about them. These persecuted people certainly deserve all out and long over due support of Indians. It is extremely important for secular Muslim personalities of India to support persecuted non-Muslims of the subcontinent. Their brand of secularism is often construed as disguised mild Islamism.

Nevertheless, I still believe that persecuted minorities from neighbouring countries must get only temporary shelter and protection in India. In long run, they should go back to their own countries. Even in 1947, in lieu of nearly 3 lakh people who left India for Pakistan, we received 1.5 crore plus non-Muslims from the erstwhile undivided Pakistan. My scientifically worked out guesstimate suggests that nearly 5 to 7 crore people, with all their natural increases, have further sneaked into India since then. This has aggravated pressure on our own lands. Some of the illegal immigrants have always aided and abetted the threat of radicalism.

India must use its influence, goodwill and power and everything at its disposal to persuade international community to create conditions in these neighbouring countries that safeguard life, liberty, dignity and all round security of all their citizens, and especially those from local minority communities, so that we do not face a refugee influx from there.

Similarly, with a friendly country like Bangladesh, Indian government must work together to rehabilitate and support all Hindu immigrants from there. We must also attempt to amicably return a larger number of non-Hindus too. It is more important to fight Islamic radicalism to safeguard all people of the subcontinent.

I am one of the strongest admirers of Bangladesh PM. I believe that besides Nelson Mandela, any other foreign leader who deserves to be awarded Bharat Ratna, it must be Banga Bandhu and his daughter and the current PM of Bangladesh.

I have spoken my mind out in the following interview purely in the national interest, with the sole objective of giving an impartial and an apolitical perspective.

Reconciling Governance,National Security and Politics

This is edited version of a write up given to Asian Affairs, UK

[Universal access to nutrition, healthcare, education, gainful employment and secure social spaces, as well as freedom to articulate powerful ideas for building institutional capacities in this direction, are vehicles for securing India’s military-defence capacities and economic prowess]

In the first week of December, I was invited at a short notice to address a small group of academics, students, professionals, politicians and journalists at India International Centre, New Delhi. The issue was ongoing impasse on the academic campuses in the national capital. I was specifically asked to speak from the perspective of national security.

I argued that a strategic vision of national security must focus on building high quality R&D and larger social harmony, alongside universal access to education, healthcare and gainful employment. War waging capacity or military security is no doubt the most direct and non-negotiable component of national security but in absence of a larger favourable  ecosystem, even such capacity, along with the rest of the variables like economic development, could erode. I also emphasized that a state like India needed strong capacity to contain irregular wars and conflicts within its own territory with minimum use of force/resources and negligible distress to citizens. This was not possible unless, the state enjoyed absolute trust of its people.

As a former Securocrat, fighting a court battle against alleged forgery and perjury by my own former colleagues, I avoided response to persistent direct questions on some of the politically contentious issues like Citizen Amendment Bill. I was keen to avoid any politicization or partisan abuse of my views. Hence, I maintained that I could speak on such subjects only in the closed doors with the members of the government, if at all I was appraoched.

I was emphatic that a stronger national security warranted high quality researches in the Universities for technological excellence and innovation in socially relevant areas. Hence, Vice Chancellors and Academic leaders needed to shun the colonial type arrogance and reach out to students to find solutions of the ongoing impasse. These institutions needed amiable and conducive ambience, free from anxiety and insecurity. Undesirable elements, of course, needed to be segregated from bonafide scholars.

 I was urged by many members of the audience to explain my views on national security at public platforms on regular basis. I have always believed, practiced, spoken and written that a stronger India requires a stronger national security and governance capacity. It is critical not only for aspirations of 1.3 billion Indians but also for a safer world for the entire humanity.

It is well known among security establishments of the world that the idea of national security has been expanding since the end of second world war. Ever since the then US Navy Secretary James Forestall spelled out a vision of national security for his country, during a hearing in the US Senate in August 1945, several others have expanded the idea. Today, national security virtually encompasses all dimensions of governance that make up the larger military, economic, social and technological capacities. 

  Forestall had, for the first time, suggested a ‘wider and comprehensive concept, going beyond military strength to include almost everything linked with war-making potential or capacity of a state.’ These included industry, mining, research & development, technological innovation, improvement in quality of human resource and such other activities which also enhanced quality of civilian and social life’.

Today, food, water, energy and environment, apart from individual and social security, are components of national security. Some experts have gone on to incorporate diplomatic influence and soft power to security of sea-lanes and supply chain to security of outer space as national security requirements. Virtually everything that can optimise collective output and capacity of people to build an optimally secure and congenial life comes under the broad ambit of national security.

In 2016, I had attempted to suggest a national security strategy from Indian perspective in the form of my NDC dissertation. I had captioned it:  “..Governance as Bedrock of National Security”. I had emphasized on the need to build an integrated framework of effective institutions, that mutually reinforced each other. I had argued that their structures and processes must push for individual and collective excellence with a sustainable synergy between the two. I had also suggested viable and cost-effective strategies to address conflicts like subversion, radicalism, diffused & irregular wars including insurgency, terrorism, cyber and propaganda wars etc that could cripple even the most formidable states and societies in long-run. High quality institutions alone could prevent, pre-empt and deter such conflicts.

With easier mass access to disruptive and destructive technologies, rise of clandestine cliques and networks and loosening grip of existing democratic governance institutions, both governance and security apparatus in democracies needed re-orientation. They must move to the next higher stage to foster larger collaboration among different entities of state and society. This is indispensable for sustained progressive evolution of democratic societies in the technology driven globalized world. 

I had emphasized in my research work, and maintained during my interaction, that high quality population, equipped with good physical capacity, cognitive and technical skills as well as values like integrity and courage constituted the base of a strong national security pyramid.  It is clinically proven that only in a wider ambience of social trust and integrity, good leadership and good democratic institutions can flourish. If excellence requires larger process of competition and collaboration, alongside containment of conflict, the strategic focus of governance and national security must be on building good individuals and vibrant societies.

To drive home the point that welfare state is not charity, I must quote Austrian Welfare state expert Marin Bernd as well as German and Danish academics namely Herbert Obinger and Klaus Peterson. They have presented extensive and credible data to argue that it were military Generals  who pushed for welfare state in Europe. With rise of mass warfare and universal conscription, they were concerned at deficient pool of population from which the soldiers had to be recruited. Large components of military recruits in Europe were often found to be unfit for military service. Bernd has quoted these figures at 51%  for Switzerland (1878), 54% for Germany (1873) and up to 70% for Austro Hungarian empire (1912).  Even during second World War, he has argued that “50% of US industrial workers and 40% of Japan’s army draft were unserviceable.”

Until late 19^th Century or even early 20^th Century, Europe was known for deficiencies in education of children, adolescent and young male population, high infant mortality or child birth mortality of  mothers, rampant diseases like tuberculosis etc. Even during the first world war, a write-up in the Journal of Contemporary History (Sage Publications, Ltd. Vol. 15, No. 2 Apr., 1980) has chronicled the growing sentiment in favour of ‘nourishing the new generation of children  as tomorrow’s Imperial Army’. It quotes the then British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, in a speech at Manchester in 1917 that “A grade empires cannot be manned by C grade population.”

Hence, universal access to nutrition, healthcare, education and gainful employment for the entire population as well as innovation of ideas and institutions for such purposes, must not be left on the altruistic discretion of a few. These are powerful vehicles for securing whole gamut of national security objectives, including “defence capabilities and military-economic strengths.”

A strategic national security vision of India must push for building high quality manpower and high-quality leaders in each and every sector. It would require a well thought out restructuring of governance institutions, skirting the emotive issue of identity. People are least likely to act rationally when their identity appears challenged.  Hence, public debates and discourses require simultaneous confidential engagements among stakeholders, lest the dream of resurrection of civilizational state of India is shattered forever.

There will be resistances from formidable self-serving cartels in India for any move in this direction. They have traditionally blocked powerful ideas and talents from coming in to public domain. Their clout appears intact even now as serious governance reforms for genuinely strong and sustainable national security architecture appear nowhere on the horizon. 

India's Crying Need for a Robust Criminal Justice System

(This is edited version of a piece written for Asian Affairs, UK)

A deficient criminal justice system not only hinders rule of law but also impedes internal security and social harmony, which are critical for economic development and national security

Supreme Court's decision on November 26 to dismiss a minority government in the India's commercially powerful state of Maharashtra underlined the significance of an independent judiciary for the health of the world's biggest democracy. Raising hopes of a smooth governance, at least for sometime, it brought to an end weeks of uncertainty and political squabbles, involving multiple machinations and counter-machinations, that had followed the fractured mandate in the state.

However, all is still not well with the India's criminal justice system. It was a high-stake political dispute that drew immediate response from the top court. And the court acted swiftly and decisively, living up to its reputation of impartiality and integrity, to reassert its credibility. But a large number of matters that profoundly impact the course of democracy, and lives of the citizens, fail to even reach the courts. Even this verdict, with all its virtues, only pronounces who will rule. It is no guarantee that such a rule shall be free of corruption and in accordance with the rule of law to uphold larger interests of the people and the country.

Not too long ago, early this month on November 02, streets of national capital witnessed an ugly fracas between members of two crucial wings of criminal justice system of the country. Policemen in uniform were assaulted and chased by groups of lawyers around various court complexes in the city.

The provocation was an illegal arrest and custodial beating of a young lawyer over a petty dispute in a district court complex. A spokesman for the lawyers alleged that the police opened fire, injuring scores of them. The police, however, denied any firing from their side.

Over 20 policemen were injured and dozens of their vehicles torched by the protesting lawyers. Clashes continued even on the subsequent day and similar number of lawyers too were reported injured. In an unprecedented protest, members of the junior ranks of Delhi Police staged a massive demonstration in front of their HQ on November 5, booing their Chief, who sought to pacify them.  Lawyers too boycotted work for nearly a week, dislocating the judicial process in the city. However, sustained efforts by senior lawyers and police officers eventually restored peace and both sides resumed their respective duties.

The episode may pass off as an aberration in India’s sustained pursuit of a credible criminal justice mechanism. Nevertheless, it was a shocking spectacle in the national capital of the world's biggest democracy, where members of neither the police force nor the legal profession showed any respect for the due processes of law, something that they are expected to uphold and protect for the entire citizenry. The incident, no doubt, exposed a deeper underlying ailment afflicting the entire criminal justice system of the country.

By any global standard, the Indian police has produced some first-rate professionals and leaders. Almost every year, a significant number of men and women from police agencies lay down their lives in the call of duty. But India’s police forces, especially the lower rungs, have a longstanding record of notoriety.

Last year, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India recalled an observation, made half a century ago by Justice A N Mullah of Allahabad High Court, describing the police force of India’s biggest state, Uttar Pradesh, as ‘an organized gang of criminals’. Dealing with complaints of extra-judicial killings, wrongful detentions, custodial murders, sexual assaults, false implication of innocents and cover-ups, the apex human rights body of the country observed: ‘There is not a single lawless group in the whole of country whose record of crime comes anywhere near… that of the single organised unit which is known as the Indian police force…’

The Indian police has retained many of its colonial features, even after seven decades of independence. It continues to be governed largely by an archaic 1860 Act, with only minor modifications, and remains more a tool in the hands of the executive, lacking the autonomy and accountability necessary to serve as an instrument of the rule of law to protect citizens. A large number of retired police officers with strong professional credentials have beseeched successive governments for comprehensive police reforms to align the country’s police forces with the requirements of a modern representative democracy.

Flawed induction, deficient training, seniority- and loyalty-based promotions, which often disregard professional and leadership attributes, have crippled the capacity of Indian states to administer laws efficiently and impartially. Malevolent sections of police agencies are suspected of patronising, abetting and colluding in virtually all shades of crime. Similar sections in the political and corporate worlds, the legal profession and media have emerged as their partners to create a powerful nexus. In recent years, even the top officers of the country’s most credible investigative agency, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), have come under the scanner on charges varying from graft to collusion with high-profile law-breakers.

There is conflicting data on the total number of complaints registered against police personnel in India; they vary anywhere between 50,000 to half a million or more. The National Crime Record Bureau placed the figure at 54,916 for the year 2015, while one media report quotes that in 2018 alone there were 1.1 lakh complaints against Delhi police personnel. Yet only one out of every 400 was investigated. Most state police agencies lack an effective independent police complaint commission, which one finds in developed democracies, to rein in erring police personnel. A protracted judicial process ensures that most crimes committed by men and women in police uniform go unreported.

Such a scenario must be demoralising for the large number of police men and women who do their duty diligently. Recent years have witnessed a spurt in assaults on working police personnel. Several entities, including Human Rights Watch (HRW), have recorded inhuman working conditions among lower rung police forces. These utterly desensitise them, often inducing brutal responses in their dealings with the public. Indeed, multiple videos doing the rounds on social media show policemen abusing and assaulting unarmed people, including one involving a blind student on the streets of New Delhi.

A cop in uniform is the most direct symbol of the state. Any assault on such a person is an assault on the sovereignty of that state. In a democratic state, the police is expected to protect citizens and command their trust through exemplary conduct and integrity. India needs to build a larger ecosystem that fosters such a relationship between the police and the public.

As for India’s legal community, although it too boasts some of the most brilliant minds observing the highest levels of scruples, in practice, the entire profession lacks well-defined yardsticks, including transparent fee structures, hourly working mechanisms or professional specialisations. High quality legal services are virtually unaffordable, not only for the masses but even for most of the middle classes, with competent lawyers on an average charging fees in the range of $5000 to $50,000 per appearance in cases that involve multiple hearings.

Perjury by lawyers or even state functionaries is rampant as there exists no effective deterrent in this direction. Many who have earned a degree from some of the law colleges in hinterland, lack even a passing familiarity with the basics of law. Many legal practitioners, especially in the lower courts, are known for their own criminal records, which was amply manifest during their clashes with the police.

Nevertheless, there are still some good lawyers– though too few – who remain committed to the pursuit of justice even under the most adverse circumstances. They take on a significant number of pro-bono cases to help the poor and needy in a system that lacks effective legal aid by the state.  Such sections certainly need support and encouragement from both the state and the society.

The Indian judiciary, especially the apex court, has traditionally been known for consistently delivering exemplary judgements on some of the most complex issues in the public domain. Even now, the top court comes out with judicious interpretations of the most vexed issues of law that are part of public discourse. But judges and lawyers are overworked in virtually all Indian courts.

India’s Law Minister recently disclosed on the floor of the parliament that as on June 1 this year, 43.55 lakh cases were pending in various High Courts, including 8.35 lakhs that were older than a decade. Such pendency in the Supreme Court was nearly 60,000, while in the lower courts it could be much higher. Very often judges hear 60 to 70 or even 100 or more matters in the course of a single day spanning a duration of five to six hours. It is not humanly possible to comprehend complex issues in two to five minutes and then pronounce a fair verdict. Hence, miscarriages of justice are quite common unless a matter is too high-profile.

Such deficiencies within the criminal-justice system not only deny citizens fair and consistent access to rights guaranteed by the constitution, but also retard national security by breeding avoidable internal conflicts. These nullify Indian democracy’s promise of the rule of law and discourage economic enterprise and industry, crippling the collective output of India as a nation. A weak criminal justice system also cedes a bigger space to subversive forces, which thrive at the cost of the country.

India’s quest for stronger national security warrants greater professionalism, innovation and integrity in the entire criminal justice system. It must prevent, preempt and deter internal conflicts to build an ambience that fosters healthy competition and collaboration among citizens. 

FROM HOUSTON TO MAMALLAPURAM AND BEYOND

Diplomatic successes are no substitute for efficient governance, observes Jitendra Kumar Ojha, who believes India needs sustained reforms in this regard if it is to pursue its aspirations as a great global power.

  (This is a piece written for Asian Affairs, UK on October 23, 2019 for November issue of the Magazine)

     Prime Minister Modi’s grand spectacle in Houston on September 22 and his informal summit with President Xi Jinping at Mamallapuram on October 12 symbolise India’s global influence as well as his own stature as leader. Both events, but particularly the latter, signified India’s ability to transcend differences, as emphasised by the Chinese media, and to optimise convergence of interests. However, there is merit in the argument that favourable geopolitics and smart diplomacy are no substitute for good governance in India’s quest for great power status.

   The head of the world’s most powerful nation played second fiddle in his own country when 70,000-strong crowds – the biggest ever to assemble in the US for a visiting dignitary other than the Pope – cheered and listened to Modi at Houston’s NRG stadium. The US decision to hike duties on Indian steel and aluminium and withdraw GSP for Indian exports did not appear to have affected the personal bonhomie between the leaders of the world’s two largest democracies. Showering the Indian-American community with effusive praise for their positive contribution to US society, President Trump emphasised his own endeavours to boost Indo-US trade and defence ties. He specifically highlighted US support for the Indian space programme and mutual efforts to curb terror, to the delight of the Indian audience.

   Local media reported that President Trump made good political capital out of the event, which could shore up his support within the Indian-American community int he upcoming presidential polls. His quip ‘Abki baar Trump Sarkar’ (‘This time Trump Government’) summed up this underlying sentiment and his eagerness to borrow Modi’s winning formula.

Details of the outcome of the Mamallapuram summit can never be known, although Foreign Secretary Gokhale assured the media that Kashmir, as an internal matter for India, was not discussed. This was significant,given President Xi’s meeting with Pakistani PM Imran Khan in Beijing hours before embarking on his India tour. Military-backed Khan, who emerged victorious following a dubious 2018 poll, has been seeking to exploit unease in the Kashmir Valley. By projecting the abrogation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status as an assault on Muslims, he has not only attempted to whip up nationalist sentiment at home but also sought, albeit with negligible success, to make common cause with Muslim nations.

The Chinese media hailed the Xi-Modi summit as a ‘new beginning in bilateral cooperation’ that would provide ‘stability and positive energy to the current world, full of uncertainties’. Many among them appreciated India’s decision to consolidate trade and other ties,despite choosing to stay away from China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

A closer look, however, suggests that India’s ability to garner dividends from such diplomatic successes and geopolitical influence remains limited. India has continued to slide over the past decade or so on most governance parameters. What started with the exposure of corruption and scams in the UPA era has now taken the form of serious all-round economic decline and uncertainty. The gap between India’s potential and its actual progress towards great power status has never appeared wider.

Despite promising to be in the same league as China until a decade ago, India now looks a minnow by comparison. China’s five times bigger economy (nearly US $14 trillion, compared to less than $3 trillion for India) does not adequately sum up its superiority in technological excellence and innovations. Chinese R&D investments are gradually getting closer to those of the United States, with many of its institutions of excellence pushing frontiers of knowledge. Its advances in artificial intelligence, space technologies and 5G internet services, and its rapid strides in human development, public infrastructure, fin-tech and military modernisation have taken it on a different trajectory. Comparable figures of India’s economic growth do not tell the real story.

India, accounting for barely over 2 per cent of total world trade, with a significant deficit and a high share of primary products in its exports, is nowhere close to the 12.5 per cent share of China, with a considerable surplus of exports dominated by manufactured goods. The volume of Indo-US trade in 2018-19, amounting to US$86.9 billion,with a surplus of $16.9 billion in India’s favour, pales into insignificance when compared to US-China trade of $737.1 billion,with $378.6 billion surplus for China. For the US, India is hardly a serious trade partner, given that the volume of its trade with Canada, the EU and Japan stands at $627.8 billion, $575 billion and $217 billion respectively. Similarly, Sino-Indian bilateral trade of around $95 billion, which is heavily skewed in favour of the former, is much smaller compared to that of China’s own trade with Germany, Japan,Hong-Kong and others. That said, India still remains a profitable market for China.

The rise of India as a bigger stakeholder in the global order will have a stabilising impact in the context of Chinese expansionism

China may not be able to surpass the economic, military and technological might of the US in the foreseeable future. But it has increasingly carved out, and continues to expand, much larger domains of influence.These are manifest in its rising global footprints from Oceania, the Far-East to the West of Asia, almost all of Africa and South America, and parts of Europe. Its initiatives, varying from the BRI, Asia Infrastructure & Investment Bank (AIIB) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, have registered significant global influence.

Many in American policy establishments, who in the past pushed for deeper strategic ties with India, insist that US commitment to India must go beyond reciprocity in tactical matters.India is in no position to act as a countervailing influence on China, nor should US policy aim at that. The rise of a democratic India as a bigger stakeholder in the global order will have a stabilising impact in the context of China’s aggressive expansionism.In this context, the US establishment shows greater understanding towards India’s freedom to conduct its relations with others, including its traditional friend Russia or others in Asia and beyond.

Simultaneously, there are elements in the US, albeit smaller in number, who do not favour any accommodation to the world’s biggest democracy in matters of trade. India, however, appears confident dealing with such duality. At the India-US Strategic Partnership Forum in New Delhi on October 21, Foreign Minister Jaishankar gave assurances that Indo-US ties were strong enough to resolve differences on trade.

There has been considerable discussion in the Indian media,as well as efforts on the part of the government, to de-hyphenate India from Pakistan. This is not possible without destroying the Pakistani capacity for covert and proxy war by invoking Islam. Pakistan is probably a unique territory whose state power, including the armed forces, is controlled by syndicates who have little commitment to their own people. They have been privately thriving on all shades of transnational crime,from money laundering to illicit trade in narcotics, arms and fake currencies, among others. Jihad and Kashmir provide a strong smokescreen for pursuing such activities. The integrity and professionalism of India’s governance institutions are prerequisites for destroying the space for covert war.

Chinese support for Pakistan, to pre-empt any possible – but currently non-existent –competition from India could potentially backfire quite severely in the long run. Radicalisation and subversion in the name of Islam may hit well beyond Uyghur-dominated Xinjiang if these build a strong momentum. The CCP’s pursuit of the resurrection of the glorious civilisational state of China certainly requires it to oppose radicalism at a global stage.

India has to go beyond minor tweaks in policies or tactical initiatives to bolster its institutional capacity of governance. Sustained and comprehensive reforms are compulsory if enduring solutions are to be found to the fledgling economy, rising unemployment, deficient human capital, poor infrastructure and technological stagnation, or even the larger menace of corruption that has been eating away at Indian society and the economy like termites.

India’s status-driven generalist civil service may have multiple examples of individual brilliance. But it is ill-equipped to translate policy visions into reality. Tortuously slow and highly unpredictable judicial processes can neither ensure observance of the rule of law nor promote trust in contracts. Advancement of knowledge and technological innovation require an ambience of congeniality within institutions of excellence rather than obtrusive control. The most serious structural reforms are probably required in India’s corporate sector,to optimally generate wealth and create jobs.

This is simply not possible if political parties do not transition into credible platforms for right talent and instruments to aggregate powerful ideas for better governance. A free media is useful only if it throws up facts and enlightened perspectives impartially and with integrity. The current dynamics of market and democratic instruments appear incapable of making any headway in this direction. Nevertheless, Prime Minister Modi has the mandate and global standing to script a newer history beyond text books by pushing for radical reforms in governance structures and processes.

India’s governance challenges are unique, as is its wider social and economic context.It has to explore a model of democratic governance beyond what is known in the West,but Chinese authoritarianism simply goes against the grain of Indianism.

The resurrection of a civilisational state of India along modern scientific lines, but incorporating some of the essential ingredients of ‘Dharma’ – right selfless conduct or integrity – is critical, not only to address the aspirations of 1.3 billion Indians. It is also indispensable for the stability of a wider global equilibrium. History rarely offers such opportunities for human ingenuity and initiatives that are available to India at this juncture.

---

Jitendra Kumar Ojha, a former Joint Secretary in Government of India and an alumnus of National Defence College, with research degrees in Diplomacy and Defence and Strategic Studies, has specialised in various dimensions of national security