Col Ajay Raina (Retd)
Change, being a constant, spares nothing-be it climate or moral values. This being a harsh reality, there may be a need to revisit certain fundamental thoughts that dictate the conventional responses to such changes. In fact, in layman’s language, if the change is constant, any conventional methodology is likely to fall short when it comes to tackling newer challenges thrown up by such changes. This article will look at the law and order issue as it undergoes a transformation like everything else.
Organised rioting is nothing new. The 1946 Direct Action Day is one painful example of such an organised affair that resulted in a virtual genocide in Bengal and elsewhere. However, if a look is taken on the profile of riots in today’s India, we see an annual average of around 50,000 recorded riots happening between 2014 and 2020 (as per the National Crime Bureau data) with approximately 700 of such riots being communal in nature, again on an annual basis. Such figures are worrying since this data points towards a tendency to rampage at the drop of a hat. At the same time, such statistics also allow us to analyse the changing trends when it comes to rioting. As mentioned, organised rioting is nothing new, but the frequency and profile of such riots have been steadily intensifying over the decades. Days of organic, spontaneous rioting are not completely over and yet the fact remains that the losses in terms of lives, property, business and reputation due to one organised riot surpass similar impacts caused collectively by dozens of spontaneous ones. Organised riots and violence whether in Delhi and elsewhere (1984), Kashmir (1989-90), Godhra and Gujarat (2002), Muzaffarnagar (2013) or Delhi (2020) are some of the examples forever etched in our memory because of the degree of ferocity and vehemence engineered through a fair amount of behind-the-scenes planning and preparations. A trend of so-claimed peaceful protests turning violent is also on the rise. We saw it through the 26 January chaos during the farmers’ protests when an attempt was made to harm the prestige of the nation. In a nutshell, therefore, the overall profile of riots has been changing rapidly. One doesn’t really have to google the events of the past; what is happening in France and its European neighbours or in Manipur as this article goes to press, is an example of what is being alluded to.
The reason for such a change can be found in the dynamic geopolitics of our times. Democracies across the globe are under attack. Democracy, as a concept, may have its limitations, and many observers feel the time for such styles of governance is already over. But what is significant is how attacks are launched against such a concept. Readers are aware of a lobby of prominent people with deep pockets (also called the Deep State) working untiredly towards toppling democratically elected governments across the globe. The case of India, in any case, is at another level. In addition to being a democracy, it is rising in stature like never before. In a world conventionally steered by the global North, a new powerhouse rising and carrying along the global South is something not easily digestible by many, including our friends in the West. In such a scenario, the likelihood of attacks on India through riots and violence remains the highest.
Unlike the 1946 organised slaughter, however, organised riots are now invariably planned in foreign lands, sponsored through illegal money transactions and executed through manipulation of the unsuspecting population segments by influencers who have their coffers overflowing with greens. Such a change translates into a scenario where much damage is already done before the state deploys its resources to counter such a development. In our context, with police reforms long overdue and political interference in policing being much beyond acceptable limits, it also means that the damage continues even when the men and women in khakis are deployed as a response to such incidents. Manipur is a live example of what is being referred to. The kind of weaponry used and the alleged involvement of the Chinese and Burmese elements led to a situation where police became ineffective and armed forces were defamed even before they were called out of barracks. As can be seen, the new profile of riots encompasses the use of social media and vernacular press for propaganda, modern weaponry against an ill-equipped, ill-trained police force, a seemingly unceasing supply of funds and loud noises in the far-off lands. What Barack Obama said recently, therefore, is nothing but part of such packaging.
Such ground realities logically lead us to look at the effective response to the changing profile of riots and violence. As mentioned, our police forces are incompetent to handle such challenges. The fault for such a handicap lies elsewhere, i.e., our successive governments who have not been serious about the police reforms put on the table by various studies and a report by National Police Commission as also directions of the Supreme Court in the Parkash Singh vs Union of India case. Let us assume, though hypothetically, that all such reforms get implemented today, and a significant change comes in over the next two years through a new system of training, the introduction of weapons and the setting up of a checks-and-balances mechanism. Will such a welcome change in policing suffice? Unfortunately, the answer is NO. And there are reasons for such pessimism.
The modus-operandi of the trouble creators necessitates a whole-of-nation approach at the macro level. On the ground, however, it boils down to numbers and statistics. With numerical superiority and newer weapons and tools amidst its ranks, even a stone-pelting mob can make a police force run for life. We have seen so many incidents in the recent past where huge mobs have molested cops left behind by their fleeing colleagues. That being a reality of statistics, what is the way out?
Numerical inferiority can be offset to a certain extent by superior firepower. But then the question of ethics will arise, and opposition parties, as they exist today, will be the first ones to hit the street. Can we really treat our own citizens as enemies and open indiscriminate fire like, say Jallianwala massacre? To add to the difficulty, carrying the Tricolour while shouting anti-India slogans and pelting stones at the forces is a new trend. Any matching response from the other side then makes sensational headlines and breaking news. As we can see, it is a complex problem with no template-based situation. In any case, the conventional methodology of dealing with such situations is no longer relevant now.
As mentioned, any response to such emerging situations has to be framed based on the principle of a whole-of-nation approach. There is a need to make new laws to classify mobs who indulge in rioting and violence. Confiscating their properties, a fair amount of jail terms in distant states and labelling them anti-nationals officially for their future government employment and social welfare schemes could be some of the ingredients of such a law. Similarly, a decision needs to be taken whether allowing them a free hand just because they are citizens of India (and many Rohingyas and Bangladeshis are actually not!) is the most reasonable approach or treating them differently after a red line is crossed is the way forward. In a nation plagued by juvenile laws allowing underage rapists to lead a life of freedom and commit more rapes later, such contradictions must be addressed through a strong political will.
Coming to the action on the ground. It is a fact and a necessity that police can’t be armed beyond a point. Police have many roles, and too much armoury in their hands can have negative consequences. To mitigate such a situation, we have Central Police Organisations (CPOs) like CRPF, SSB and ITBP with better weapon profiles. It is not uncommon to see such forces deployed alongside and under the control of local police authorities in affected areas. But if such a response, too, fails to yield the desired effect, the nation finally turns to the armed forces. Long considered the nation’s last resort, even army columns remain prone to numerical imbalances when it comes to mob control. We did see glimpses of such incidents during reservation riots in Haryana in the recent past. Moreover, a lack of knowledge about the local urban layout and dialect remains a handicap for a force primarily meant to defend our borders. It is, thus, a catch-22 situation! There seems to be no fool-proof solution to this reality, more so when viewed from a conventional viewpoint.
To overcome the dilemma created by such a traditional approach, let’s look at the changing conflict scenarios worldwide. Barring the Ukraine conflict and some skirmishes in Central Asia, the world seems to have moved past the era of conventional military wars. What can be achieved through subversion and proxy exceeds the bearing that may or may not be achieved through a war that entails huge financial expenditure. If that be so, and it is actually so, is there a case to simultaneously deploy all kinds of resources that the nation has at its disposal to nip the trouble in its bud collectively, or do we continue to follow the graduated model of sending in local police first, followed by the CPOs and then Army? Manipur here and France there have thrown up questions that need vulnerable nations like India to revisit the methodology of addressing such threats. Borders remain relevant as long as there is peace and order inside. If, therefore, our intelligence agencies intercept and synthesise the intelligence in time, is there any harm in sending in all that can be sent to prevent a situation rather than allowing the situation to flare up and then open the age-old SOP book and hope for the best? August 2019 modus operandi in Kashmir is a fine example of the judicious use of national resources.
Coming from a veteran, this suggestion will likely draw fierce criticism from the fraternity. How the army can be used as a police force is a question that will be thrown up. I have two anticipatory responses to such a question. The first one-it has been the Indian Army doing the police’s job in the Kashmir Valley, which has stabilised the Valley as we see it today. However bitter the pill must have been, it was swallowed at the right time, and we saw 1.25 cr tourists visiting Kashmir during the preceding year. Most importantly, peace that ensures the safety and security of life has been achieved by allowing the army to do what it is not traditionally supposed to do. Secondly, defending the nation against any threat that can destabilise it is also a valid interpretation of the armed forces’ role. A country on fire will be fooling itself by claiming its borders are secured!
Change, as said, is ruthless and spares none-be it national security imperatives or the role of its assets equipped to deal with such necessities.
(The author is a writer and a military historian)
Follow our WhatsApp channel