Defence Notes
New Delhi, 21 May 2007
An Unprofessional Policy
ARMY DEPLOYMENT, CIVIL CONTROL
By B.K. Mathur
The Army deployment in Jammu and Kashmir for
tackling prolonged militancy has raised several issues
concerning the country’s armed forces. Two most controversial of them are their
deployment for civil duties and, if deployed, under what control and command.
This depends upon the type of assignment.
Deployment in aid of civil authority has necessarily
to be under civil control, but the Jammu and Kashmir
assignment is entirely different,
where the Army is fighting for years a war-like situation against foreign
militants, professionally trained
for military operations in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
For such a deployment, the Army needs to be given full control and command,
without which it becomes difficult for it to achieve its assigned task.
Presently a controversy is going
on in J&K between the ruling coalition partners, the Congress and the PDP over the army deployment in the
State. The latter party is persisting with its demand to withdraw the Army or
reduce its presence in some crucial areas in pursuance of its “healing touch”
policy, a policy which the armed forces personnel do not understand by virtue
of their basic training. They are trained to “kill” to achieve their target.
They have to be reckless with
complete control and command. The State’s Chief Minister is against withdrawal
or reduction of the Army at this stage in view of the existing situation in
which the infiltration has increased during the last two months. But, at the
same time, he continues to talk about human rights and advises the Army to
observe restrain in handling the militancy, an entirely unprofessional policy.
Military intelligence and the GoC-in-C
of the Northern Army Command have informed the Government with facts and
figures that the infiltration of trained militants from across the border has increased during the last two
months, April and May, as compared to figures of the corresponding period last
year, despite the confidence-building measures (CBMs) for peace between the two
neighbours. The infiltration has taken place by cutting the barbed wire fencing
at several points along the Line of Control (LoC) and attempts to sneak in with
the mortar and even artillery support from behind in the Pak-held area, have
been foiled by the Army units. At times exchange of fire has taken place for
hours together.
Those who have been repeatedly
demanding the Army withdrawal to the barracks or its re-deployment seem to have
missed the well-planned strategy of
the militants; a diabolical gameplan. They are sneaking into the Indian territory but not striking. Instead of increase in
violent incidents there is decrease which gives one the impression that the militancy is now under control and
that the Governments at the Centre and in the State would be forced under
political pressure to withdraw or
reduce the Army deployment. It is evident that the gameplan of the militants
and their supporters in Islamabad
is to regroup the militants and prepare them for their operational readiness for a massive
strike as was planned prior to the Kargil operation in 1999.
The first principle of a military
operation is to take the enemy by surprise to ensure success. This was their strategy prior to operation when
they quietly prepared for a long time as proved by the construction by them of
multi-purpose bunkers and ammunition stores not only in Skardu but also close
to the LoC. The reaction of the Army based in J&K should obviously be to prepare
itself for such an eventuality and be ruthless
in handling the militants trying to regroup themselves with the help of local
elements. For such a readiness to
counter a possible attack, the Army
needs to be given compete authority without any political interference or any
talk of “healing touch” or “human rights”, notwithstanding the fact that the unified
command in the State is headed by the Chief Minister.
The greatest tragedy of nearly
too decades of militancy is that the Pak-trained militants have been harboured
by a large number of local people across
the State and allowed to live and act at will. Such people who harbour the
nation’s enemy have not been tackled more because of political reasons rather
than Army laxity. In fact, the Army has suffered tremendously all these years
of losing large-number of its personnel at the hands of the “hidden militants”
living in safe buildings, virtually out-of-bounds for military action. Such
militants are not only just harboured but also allowed to carry, and even store,
arms and ammunition to kill the men of the security while on the move to tackle
the bigger operations by the enemy. The personnel are killed undefended, with
their hands tried to their back.
This at once reminds one of the Indian
Peace Keeping Force’s (IPKF) mission
of the Army against the LTTE in north-eastern parts of Sri Lanka in mid-1980s. This writer
visited the area twice and saw with great surprise the Indian soldiers fighting
the LTTE offensive with their hands virtually tied to their back. They were
asked to keep peace in the region, help the Lankan Government without
undertaking any operation intended to kill the enemy or to occupy any land. In
the process, the Army lost a large
number of its men, without fighting any regular operation. Unfortunately, on
their return from the assignment
some pro-LTTE element in India
equated the IPKF mission with the
Mylai operation in Vietnam.
Sri
Lanka has again tried last week to get around New Delhi for military assistance to tackle the continuing problem with the
LTTE. The Tigers, as the LTTE activists are called, have armed themselves adequately
in the last two decades to fight the Lankan forces to get freedom for the
Tamilian-dominated north-eastern region of the Island
nation. As in 1983-84, Colombo has asked New Delhi for military assistance to fight the Tigers, who have now become
much stronger than during the 1980s. They have also acquired air power, which
could be a danger to India
also. If India fails to help
them, the Lankans have indicated they would take military equipment from China and Pakistan. Both Beijing
and Islamabad have been trying for long to establish
their bases in the Indian Ocean and surely both will jump at the opportunity of
military relationship with Colombo.
It would be strategically wise
for New Delhi somehow to stop China and Pakistan
getting militarily close to Sri
Lanka. National Security Adviser M.K.
Narayanan is right in quickly offering to Colombo
“whatever its requirement”, with a rider that New Delhi’s assistance
would be confined to “defensive capabilities”. Importantly, if the Army
personnel are to be deployed in Sri
Lanka even for training or equipment
maintenance purposes, they need be sent with clear directions and authority to
take on-the-spot decisions required according to situation. In fact, such clear
professional directions and
authority need to be given to the forces deployed with a defined assignment, like the tackling of militancy in Jammu and Kashmir. How
they achieve the assigned target is
their business---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance))
|