Opponents of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in J&K have gone into a silent mode after discovering that they have no force that could match up to the Army in bringing peaceto the trouble-torn and communally sensitive state. They have discovered to their discomfiture that they need the Army not only for counter-insurgency operations but also for enforcing the routine law andorder. When communal riots broke out on Eid-ul-Fitr on August 9 in Kishtwar, the Army was called out to defuse the situation; when Jammu city felt the impact of the riots, the Army was called out; when the Gool killings on July18 triggered protests, the Army was called out; and when sectarian clashes took place in Budgam on July 23, the Army was called out to deal with the situation that was threatening to go out of control. The Army was burdened with this task even as it was guarding frontiers and dealing with infiltration attempts from across the Lineof Control (LoC) and fighting terrorists in the hinterland. Itclearly showed that the Army was fighting on three fronts: defending borders and dealing with ceasefire violations all along the LoC, tracing and neutralising terrorists in the hinterland, and at the same time dealing with explosive law and ordersituation which the civilian government and its forces were unable to control. An instant question arose — that a government which wasunable to maintain law and order during clashes and was heavily dependent on the Army for almost everything, how could it offerany justification for the recallof AFSPA, which grants immunity to the armed forces engaged in counter-insurgency operations. Had the civil administration not called out the Army in these places, there would have been killings of unimaginable magnitude. The flag march by the Army in these communally sensitive areas saved the day for the government. At the same time, the voices of those demanding the removal of theAFSPA — which includes that of the ruling National Conference and in particular Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, People’s Democratic Party and separatists — have beensilenced by the Army not by matching their rhetoric but bypure action, and that too on the call of the civilian government. Incidentally, besides other places, clashes took place in Budgam and Jammu, which are among the seven districts that the state government had listed for the lifting of AFSPA in the first phase. Omar Abdullah had begun thedebate on the removal of AFSPA on October 21, 2011, when he declared “black laws(AFSPA) imposed in the state on the start of militancy will go from certain areas within the next few days.” This rhetorical speech became a chorus for the National Conference. The Army had apprised the Chief Minister and others in the government of how recalling AFSPA before watching the situation that would arise with the pullout of NATO forces from Afghanistan would prove suicidal in anti-insurgencyoperations in the state. The Army had all its facts in placeand there was no counter to that except the rhetoric and political sloganeering that was also aimed at the 2014 elections. If a state doesn’t have the capacity to deal with the normal law and order problemthen how can its police fight militancy? This question posed by strategic thinkers has an underlined meaning that at least till the beginningof 2015, any step to recall AFSPA would prove counterproductive. There is, however, no justification for extending theimmunity under AFSPA to those who violate the spirit of their duty. And those who go unpunished for criminal acts bring a bad name to the Army and the nation. The Army has to ensure that it does not take the help of AFSPA for defending the black sheep. Then its role would be better appreciated.
Opponents of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in J&K have gone into a silent mode after discovering that they have no force that could match up to the Army in bringing peaceto the trouble-torn and communally sensitive state. They have discovered to their discomfiture that they need the Army not only for counter-insurgency operations but also for enforcing the routine law andorder.
ReplyDeleteWhen communal riots broke out on Eid-ul-Fitr on August 9 in Kishtwar, the Army was called out to defuse the situation; when Jammu city felt the impact of the riots, the Army was called out; when the Gool killings on July18 triggered protests, the Army was called out; and when sectarian clashes took place in Budgam on July 23, the Army was called out to deal with the situation that was threatening to go out of control.
The Army was burdened with this task even as it was guarding frontiers and dealing with infiltration attempts from across the Lineof Control (LoC) and fighting terrorists in the hinterland. Itclearly showed that the Army was fighting on three fronts: defending borders and dealing with ceasefire violations all along the LoC, tracing and neutralising terrorists in the hinterland, and at the same time dealing with explosive law and ordersituation which the civilian government and its forces were unable to control.
An instant question arose — that a government which wasunable to maintain law and order during clashes and was heavily dependent on the Army for almost everything, how could it offerany justification for the recallof AFSPA, which grants immunity to the armed forces engaged in counter-insurgency operations.
Had the civil administration not called out the Army in these places, there would have been killings of unimaginable magnitude. The flag march by the Army in these communally sensitive areas saved the day for the government. At the same time, the voices of those demanding the removal of theAFSPA — which includes that of the ruling National Conference and in particular Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, People’s Democratic Party and separatists — have beensilenced by the Army not by matching their rhetoric but bypure action, and that too on the call of the civilian government.
Incidentally, besides other places, clashes took place in Budgam and Jammu, which are among the seven districts that the state government had listed for the lifting of AFSPA in the first phase.
Omar Abdullah had begun thedebate on the removal of AFSPA on October 21, 2011, when he declared “black laws(AFSPA) imposed in the state on the start of militancy will go from certain areas within the next few days.” This rhetorical speech became a chorus for the National Conference.
The Army had apprised the Chief Minister and others in the government of how recalling AFSPA before watching the situation that would arise with the pullout of NATO forces from Afghanistan would prove suicidal in anti-insurgencyoperations in the state. The Army had all its facts in placeand there was no counter to that except the rhetoric and political sloganeering that was also aimed at the 2014 elections.
If a state doesn’t have the capacity to deal with the normal law and order problemthen how can its police fight militancy? This question posed by strategic thinkers has an underlined meaning that at least till the beginningof 2015, any step to recall AFSPA would prove counterproductive.
There is, however, no justification for extending theimmunity under AFSPA to those who violate the spirit of their duty. And those who go unpunished for criminal acts bring a bad name to the Army and the nation. The Army has to ensure that it does not take the help of AFSPA for defending the black sheep. Then its role would be better appreciated.
Peace is an unstable equilibrium.Outof 3421 years of
ReplyDeleterecorded history only 268 yrs didn't have war. So war
isn't an option,but a constant!