The modern thinking Indian

The military forces in India have almost a separate life with a separate code of honor and law; their life is much more controlled than the lives of ordinary civilians. As a result, they have a separate process for justice, with a separate legal system that governs them. This includes offences they commit that are normally treated as criminal offences for the normal citizens of the country such as rape, murder, theft, etc; instead, these were normally handled through the military process of court-martials where military designated justices handle these offences. This would make sense if the crime was committed at a military owned location, or at the border of the country. However, in the past, it was argued that if a soldier was on leave and then committed a crime, even this was under the jurisdiction of military justice. This was because even under casual leave, the soldier was still under the jurisdiction of the army. However, a judge of the Madras High Court has ruled that such offences can also be handled in the civilian court system (link to article):

The Madras High Court Bench in Madurai has held that the armed forces personnel accused of committing murder, rape and other such crimes could be tried in a criminal court and not necessarily through court martial.
Justice A Selvam in his order yesterday said both the criminal court as well as the Army courts enjoyed concurrent jurisdiction to try criminal offences. Justice Selvam agreed that a soldier on casual leave could be considered to be in active service. However, he said that neither Army act nor the code of criminal procedure prevented a criminal court from conducting trial against servicemen.

This makes a lot of sense, since if a crime is committed under the laws of the country, it should be handled by the constitutionally valid legal system of the country.

Labels: Army, Crime, India, Judgment, Judicial, Law, Legal, Military

It has always puzzled a large number of people as to why the Taliban seem to be generating a lot of support in the Pakistani countryside. After all, a group that believes in a harsh interpretation of Islamic jurisprudence and acts to implement their beliefs should not be succeeding at this rate. Even in a society where women are not supposed to have equal rights, are not supposed to show their faces (or their bodies) to strangers, or come out in the open, the customs imposed by the Taliban are draconian. Women cannot come out of their homes unless escorted by a male relative (even if it is an emergency), cannot study in schools, and numerous other such practices are enforced by the Taliban in the area that they control. However, even men are not left untouched - music is deemed un-Islamic unless it is music in praise of Allah, men are forbidden to shave and should have turbans, no watching movies, be sure to follow the calls to prayer during the day, and so on. Recently, they killed both the man and woman who had eloped and whose families had reported them.
So, a bit of research, and one started reading a lot more about the society where the Taliban thrive. The rural areas of Pakistan are societies that are extremely backward; there is little economic development, feudalism and the power of the moneyed and the landlords is immense, the instruments of the state (bureaucracy, police, judicial, etc) are not of much help to the common man and corruption is immense. In such areas, the promise of bringing in Islamic law (sharia) that does not distinguish between the rich and the poor can attract a huge number of people, can make them converts. As a bonus, the people who make up the Taliban are people who resemble the poor rural folks a lot; they are less educated, poor; the difference is, they are part of a movement that can look the moneylender / police man / feudal lord in the eye and not have to back down. Here is an article that explains the Robin Hood type of image (link to article):

In radio broadcasts and sermons, Taliban militants have been promoting themselves as Islamic Robin Hoods, defending Pakistan's rural poor from a ruling elite that they describe as corrupt and oppressive. That message has been resonating throughout the Pakistani countryside, where the culture is deeply conservative and the people are desperately poor. "Justice [in Pakistan] is only for people who have money," Daoud said, while slicing through handfuls of grass with a small scythe. "We are illiterate," he added, "but we are hoping that with Islamic sharia law, our lives will get better."
Enforcement of sharia law is the platform the Taliban have been using to justify recent land-grabs, such as last week's armed occupation of the district of Buner, some 60 miles from the Pakistani capital. Militants have slowly taken over territory in northwestern Pakistan by first targeting unpopular landlords and bureaucrats, according to Amnesty International, the human rights watchdog. "Its systematic. The Taliban move into an area, they use local existing resentments. They often go in with the guise of being Robin Hoods," said Amnesty International representative Sam Zarifi. "They scare away some local thieves, they impose very, very quick justice, very harsh justice, and initially in some places they are even welcomed."

And how are the Taliban fought ? Attempts to reform society to make it more even and less corrupt do not go anywhere (or are not even made); the military has fought the Taliban in parts, but the battle is a battle in which innocents are affected and make them resentment of the efforts of the military; the presence of the US drones that make frequent bombing runs of villages in order to eliminate terrorists are seen as invasions of Pakistani sovereignty, and killing of innocents only serves to inflame the population even more.
What can be done ? The effort has to be bring down the Robin Hood image of the Taliban by reducing corruption levels, by making more development in these regions, and at the same time, confronting them militarily. One wonders whether Pakistan can do all this ?

Labels: Army, Corruption, Development, Education, Governance, Military, Pakistan, Taliban

The last week has seen a major upheaval in Bangladesh, that too just a couple of months after the long-awaited transition back to civilian rule. After years of army rule, finally elections were held, and Sheikh Hasina won comfortably over her rival Begum Khaleda Zia. However, it was expected that since the powerful army did not like either Sheikh Hasina or Begum Zia (holding them to be corrupt, and essentially not good rulers), Sheikh Hasina would have to contend with a powerful force not fully under her control.
However, it was difficult to believe the events of the past week. In Bangladesh, the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) has always been seen as having a much lower status than the army. This includes having its officers drawn from the army (including the head of the BDR). Also, being a paramilitary, it has been seen as having a much lower status than the regular army, and seemingly less monetary benefits (including lower pay, no chance to go for higher paying United Nations missions abroad, and so on). At some point, when the Border Guards were having a conference, a group of Border Guards were looking to have a discussion with their officers (on deputation from the army), and the discussion did not go at all well.
Reports indicate that the group of Border Guards grouped the officers together, and then shot most of them (and bayonetted many of them after shooting them). This was certainly not something that their officers would have expected to happen to them in any way; the end result is a cleanup of the officers of the Border Guards. After killing many of the officers (and in many cases, their families who were staying in the headquarters of the Border Guards), the dead were quickly put in mass graves or floated down sewers. The decimation was complete, with the top leadership of the Guards gone, and almost 130-140 officers killed over a period of 1-2 days (link):

The Bangladesh army has launched a manhunt for border guards who mutinied at their headquarters in Dhaka last week, killing about 140 army officers. The government issued arrest warrants for "1,000 guardsmen and accomplices". The mutiny by the Bangladesh Rifles apparently began as a row over pay.
The charges include conspiracy to kill officers and civilians, using weapons and explosives, creating panic, looting and trying to hide bodies.
The BBC's Mark Dummett, in Dhaka, says the fugitive border guards can expect little mercy from the army, which has now been ordered to fan out across Bangladesh to apprehend them. About 180 officers were present at the BDR annual meeting when the mutiny broke out - only 33 are known to have survived. The bodies of 70 officers have been discovered so far, many of them mutilated after being shot.

No army in the world would take such an incident lightly, and certainly not in countries where the army believes that it is one of the influential sections in the country. It would have been a test for the newly elected Prime Minister to hold back an army that must have straining at the leash to attack the border guards who killed so many of their officers. However, if that had happened, it would have undermined the civilian leadership, and led to a huge amount of bloodshed without the chance of a formal trial.

Labels: Amy, Attack, Bangladesh, BDR, Border Guards, Coup, Kill, Killing, Military, Murder, Politics, Sheik Hasina

For the first time in the country, the term 'Hindu terrorist' has come into common usage. It all started with the Malegaon blasts of September 29, outside the office of SIMI where 6 people died in the explosion, and many others were injured. As it turns out, this was not a case where terrorists, inspired by the word of radical Islam, had committed the crime. While the blast is under probe, all information that has been revealed so far by the ATS, and by the press, is that this was in the nature of a retaliatory attack (retaliation for the bomb attacks carried out by terrorists inspired by radical thought). While investigation is being carried out, this incident and the investigation has already led to a huge amount of hue and cry.
For once, both the BJP and the Shiv Sena are on the defensive. One of the main accused, the Sadhavi, Pragya Singh Thakur, was apparently a fiery speaker who was capable of rousing the spirits of people; incidentally, she was also a former national executive president of the Durga Vahini, and has been shown in the same photo as Rajnath Singh and the Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister. The BJP has disowned her and her actions, claiming that this was done after she left the organization (and this part may be true). However, many constituents of the Sangh Parivaar are not happy with this and are pitching for the BJP to support the accused. The Shiv Sena is in total support of the accused (one can always consider the Shiv Sena to have a sense of irrationality in their actions).
This is where the BJP should have been a party with a difference. Having a plank of National Security would mean that the party should stand firm against anyone who indulges in matters such as riots and bomb blasts. In this case, the refusal of the party to take a firm stand against the alleged bomb plotters means that the actions of the party are similar to the actions of the Congress, Samajwadi Party and are personally very disappointing. No matter what the reason, there cannot be any justification for supporting any brand of terrorists, whether they be terrorist inspired by radical Islamic theology or Hindu terrorists inspired by some concept of revenge. The bigger worry (based on current police reports) is that a senior army officer is involved, against their duty of protecting the nation:

Public prosecutor Ajay Misar said in the court that Purohit had attended most of the meetings organised by others accused at Kashmir, Pune, Bhopal, Nashik, and Deolali. "Since he is a senior army officer, he could have been the source for the RDX used in the bomb. We also have evidence that he distributed money to several people through his organisation through cheques and cash. The financial transactions are through hawala as well," said Misar, adding, "Purohit also trained several youths in bomb making."
Those arrested also include retired Major Ramesh Upadhyay and former Durga Vahini national executive president sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur. The ATS completed all the formalities regarding the arrest of Lt Col Purohit — the first instance of an armyman being booked for a terror act — on Tuesday evening. Purohit came in contact with Upadhyay when he was posted at Nashik as liaison unit officer. Sources said he used the Nashik stint to fraternise with the extremists in various radical Hindu outfits and to draw them into Abhinav Bharat fold.

It is incumbent to nip such attacks and planning in the bud. The country already faces enough problems from terrorists and separatists in many corners of the country without having more people join this front (and there are terrorists who are Hindu as well - the ULFA, Naxalities, and many others). The BJP and other parties should take the lead in cutting such misguided people from getting public support and that there is no sympathy for them. Else, there is no justification in the BJP blaming people for showing support for the terrorists killed in the Jamia Nagar shootout in Delhi.

Labels: Army, BJP, Congress, Hypocrisy, Investigation, Military, Police, Politics, Responsibility, Security, Terrorism, Violence

For the last several years, there has been an ongoing political discussion about whether the United States is following the correct policies with regard to getting rid of terrorism emanating from the region of Pakistan and Afghanistan, rated by many as the most likely place to generate the next big terrorist attack in the Western World. Part of that discussion is whether the United States has relied too much on Pakistan, and not pushed it hard enough to get rid of the entire support structure for terrorism in the tribal border regions. Implicit in this discussion is that Pakistan is not really doing all it can to get rid of terrorism in the region, to take on the vast support for the Taleban and terrorist elements in the wild ungoverned regions. Now, Pakistan has always claimed that this was a difficult task, that these regions have historically had a reputation for resisting any attempts to enforce a central governance; and that periodic pushes by the Army and border guards have only met fierce resistance and let to further embittering of the population in these regions, thus leading to a further support for the so-called resistance fighters.
At some point it is difficult to blame only Pakistan for this. The US has had a huge amount of analysis that claims that there is a lack of governance, civil reconstruction, and enough boots on the ground in Afghanistan. What was required that there be a push to strengthen the regional paramilitary forces, combined with an active and huge construction program in these regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan. It is when the affected population see only a military push, and the same old bad conditions with no scope for improvement that they tend to move further towards the extremist position. And in Pakistan, the Bush Administration seems to have had a blinkered vision with taking the actions of President Musharraf at face value, not applying the pressure that might have made things much better. For example, there has never been much pressure to improve the condition and training of the regional paramilitary force that might be able to help turn the tide.
All this came to my mind when I read this news report:

The United States plans to shift about $230 million in aid to Pakistan from counterterrorism programs to upgrading the nation's aging F-16 fighter jets. The new government is facing "a terrible financial crisis with food and fuel problems," the official said, and the Pakistani government "would rather tell its public they are spending their money on food and fuel," so it asked the United States to pay for the F-16 upgrades from the U.S. aid fund. Last year, Congress mandated that $300 million in aid to Pakistan go toward fighting al Qaeda and the Taliban, partly by beefing up law enforcement and developing tribal areas of the country that are hostile to the United States.
Skeptical lawmakers worry that the F-16 upgrades will divert funding from crucial counterterrorism programs and could be more about helping Pakistan competing with its rival, India, than fighting terror. Nita Lowey, chairwoman of a House subcommittee on foreign operations, said the request from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to reprogram the funding "raises serious concerns." Lowey is asking for more information before signing off on the change. "Congress provided these funds specifically for counterterrorism and law enforcement activities," Lowey said in a written statement.

This is about as short-sighted as can be. It is of critical importance that funds be spent on improving the lot of the tribal areas and improve the force that works over there. Instead, if these funds are used for improving F-16's, machines that are hardly of much use in anti-terrorism except when a force needs the support in a head-on fight with the terrorist, not something that is typically seen in the border regions.

Labels: Aid, Military, Pakistan, Terrorism, US