WHY INDIA NEEDS A ROBUST AND INDIGENOUS SCIENCE OF STATECRAFT

    A strong tactical response to a terrorist attack is critical but insufficient for deterring terrorism. Nevertheless, it is important for protection of morale of the nation. But in absence of strong strategic approach and capacity, no major power in history has ever succeeded in achieving a sustainable security. Hence, we must concurrently invest serious efforts to build strong institutional capacities to: a) effectively prevent, preempt and deter terrorism, as well as all shades of conventional and covert threats, at minimal human and material costs, in routine course of functioning of the Indian state; b) continuously optimize our national power, where economic, technological, military, intellectual, cultural, social and all other shades of strength continuously augment each other. 

    

        This will require our innovators and practitioners in the sphere of national security to stretch their wisdom, brilliance and integrity. Our political, corporate, bureaucratic, social and intellectual leaders may have to set much higher benchmarks of statesman-like character and wisdom.   

 

TERRORIST ATTACK IN KASMIR VALLEY

    I was planning to continue with my previous piece on how Waqf controversy was fracturing our social and national cohesion. There were indicators that changes in Waqf Act in the past appeared driven by a larger agenda to induce a social conflict in India as an ancillary to ongoing terrorist attacks. This appeared particularly dangerous in the context of our sluggish, inefficient and inconsistent criminal justice system.

    Meanwhile, the gruesome terrorist attack in Pahalgam has numbed the psyche of the nation by sheer wickedness of its methods and objectives. Terrorists donning, military fatigues and weapons slaughtered non-Muslim Indians over their identity. Pak Military alone has the motive and capacity to perpetrate such an attack. 

    Even in history of terrorism, this attack symbolizes the despicable depths of brutality, perversity and inhumanity to which the perennial perpetrators of terror against India have descended.  It is a wake-up call for all peaceniks in India as well as all those sheltering Pakistani terror merchants in the West or backing them elsewhere. They must appreciate that they are nurturing a monster with unusually poisonous psyche of genocidal hate against not only Hindus but all shades of non-Muslims and liberal Muslims. It is bound to devour any society that shelters, protects and nurtures it or which offers space for their activities. 

    It shall be no exaggeration to state that the very idea of Pakistan or sustenance of Pakistan, with its current power structure, is a threat to India and humanity. Similarly, any institutional constraint, or weakness, of Indian state to eradicate the hydra-headed monster of radicalism, terrorism and organised crime shall threaten people across geographical, cultural and social divides.        

    It is beauty of India's social fabric and civilisational ethos that Pakistani efforts to create a wedge between Hindus and Muslims have landed up uniting the two communities throughout the length and breadth of this country.  This is notwithstanding perverse politicking and discordant notes by a few.

    I had written on this very blog on April 13 that decline in number of terror attacks was no indicators of eradication of terrorism. 

    We must remember that terror infrastructure in this region is so well-entrenched that despite spending trillions of dollars on war on terror, the most powerful state of the world was compelled to back out, leaving the war inconclusive. This only demonstrates that the might in conventional warfare and economic-technological prowess are insufficient to win such wars. 

    World needs far more innovation in devising an effective strategy against the most diffused all-out war in name of identity that it has ever seen. This war has spread like an epidemic, instigating right wing sentiments, as counter-reaction, all over the world, dividing societies and nullifying many of the advances in human endeavours.    

INDIA HAS WEATHERED FAR TOO MUCH OF EXTERNALLY SPONSORED TERRORISM IN NAME OF ISLAM

    Barring the catastrophic 9/11/ attacks that the United States faced, no other non-Muslim state has endured as sustained onslaught of Islamist terror as India. The obvious reason is that it is located in the immediate vicinity of the epicenter of terror whose main target has been multi-cultural India where largest number of Muslims have been peacefully living with non-Muslims.

    From 1990s onwards, we have been facing terrorist attacks not only in Kashmir valley but also elsewhere as part of organised attack on our society. The most coveted target for terror perpetrators has been commercial capital of India.    

    Global Terror Index (GTI), which started documenting data on terrorism since beginning of this century,  placed India in top five states most impacted by terrorism for a long time. 

    Nevertheless, terrorist attacks had started dwindling in India after 2009. It is assessed that outside media glare, Pakistani global terror infrastructure suffered significant setbacks. Scores of nameless and faceless Indians and security personnel all over the world must have played a big role in this. Pakistani deep state was definitely under enormous all-round pressure once Financial Action Task Force (FATF) placed it in grey list (though it should have been black-listed long back).

    But the threat of organised terrorism, in name of Islam, was never eliminated. World-wide covert infrastructure of organised crime, which is immensely lucrative for its beneficiaries, has survived, notwithstanding financial crisis faced by people of Pakistan.    

GENESIS OF ISLAMIST TERRPORISM AGAINST INDIA    

    Some right wingers trace the genesis of genocidal deceptive war against unarmed civilian in name of Islam on the subcontinent to attack by Mohd Bin Qasim or raids by Ghazanavi or attack by Ghori or advent of Babur and intermittent violence continuing till genocidal partition of the subcontinent. A deceptive war against civilians has been alien to indigenous values and ethos of pre-Islamic subcontinent. They claim that original values of sub-continent envisaged ethics even in warfare. Civilians, elderly, children and women were always spared. 

     On the other hand, genocidal attacks against civilians, including women and children, and their forcible enslavement, has been cultural phenomenon of not only West Asia and Mongol or Hittite races but also Greece, Rome and Carthage or most of even Norh Africa and even East Europe. Most of these societies and cultures have evolved. But neo-converts to Islam from the sub-continent, who claim to be so different from Hindus, have taken the idea of genocidal hate against Non-Muslims to an entirely different level. This provides the raison d'etre for not only terrorism but lucrative world-wide empire of trillions of dollars worth organised crime. In a globalised world, this is probably the biggest threat to civilians and unsuspecting societies. 

    The threats and challenges on the Indian subcontinent are particularly complex.  Pakistan's military elite, backed by supplicant mullahs, have manufactured an Arab, Mongol, Mamluk and Turkic ancestry for themselves. They have been peddling a narrative of complete Islamisation of the whole of the Indian subcontinent, through all-out, genocidal war through every possible means, including treachery, deceit, false propaganda, subversion and organised crime and even genocide of Hindus. 

    Official spokespersons of Pak military and state have been more measured in their words to state that they are only different from Hindus. But their proxies and supplicants have been preaching and practicing genocidal hate against Hindus in both Pakistan and now Bangladesh as well as parts of India. While they oppress and intimidate sane and liberal Muslims at home and pretend to be liberal in the West as part of larger strategy, but their entire activities may be having a cancerous impact on cohesion of societies and security of unarmed and unsuspecting civilians well beyond this subcontinent.  

    I have always maintained that most Western academics and scholars, driven by their own stereotypes, have failed to see through the real picture. This is despite the fact that some of the Western societies are at huge risk. Instead of detecting and addressing this threat, many among them are preaching counter-hate. 

    It is possible that some of the local support systems, or propaganda machines, for Pakistani Islamist networks even in the West may be funded by clandestine organised crime. It is also suspected that real master minds of terror industry may be involved big money laundering who may have captured even some legitimate businesses in the developed Western world.       

    Hence, terrorist attacks on our soil are not stray incidents that happen on their own. There is a massive and complex world-wide invisible network who use radicalized youth as foot soldiers or fodder fuel. They need to intermittently carry out such attacks to keep their invisible empire intact. I have stated in many of my observations in media that the very dynamics of terror-crime industry is such that there may be many passive approvers and clandestine active collaborators in terrorism across all divides. They may be doing so without realising larger implications of their actions.  Certain developments in the region indicate that many powerful forces may be backing Islamist radicalism in this region over their respective geopolitical agenda. It suits their geopolitical agenda to keep this region in perpetual turmoil. It is most convenient way of obstructing rise of India by ensuring our dependence on them for a wide range of products and contain competition for their economic enterprises.  

    Amidst larger constraints of our institutions, many of which are retarding our own optimal rise, the entire scenario is quite worrying. This calls for much deeper examination and evaluation of issues spell out a framework for determined action to defend our security and geopolitical interests as well as our developmental aspirations and social cohesion. 

PROPER EVALUATION OF THE ISSUE AND EFFFECTIVE STRATEGY 

    First and foremost, the stakeholders must dispassionately see the world and issue the way these exist. They must break all stereotypes and mental blocks and barriers of clerical-academic-legal prisms. An integrated approach, fusing knowledge from a wide variety of academic disciplines and psychological training must help in seeing these issues beyond the surface.    

 

    The real master-minds of terror control a well-trained, radicalised, but fairly modern fighting force. They have all other infrastructures of a state, besides a world-wide covert network of organised criminals and well-oiled diplomatic machinery. They exploit their Islamic identity to garner a degree of goodwill among all Muslim nations. They have also established their own utility for the two most powerful states of this world. 

    Their operations and activities are impossible without subversion of institutions at a much wider scale across borders. Hence even if their average citizens are poor, they appear a fairly formidable clandestine global mercenary crime network with world-wide support.  

    They enjoy far more freedom in their tactical choices. Lacking any genuine commitment to their people, they can withstand higher casualties of their citizens. In the context of large-scale radicalization of its own population, higher casualties of their citizens may work to their advantage. It may also help them deflect popular discontent over their own failure over governance to identity war and Jehad against India.  

    But no entity can ever be invincible. They have their own share of weaknesses with multiple fissures and fault-lines. What is needed is clarity on where to hit hard with minimal effort and yet generate high impact. Its visible and invisible support structures must simultaneously be destroyed as part of larger objective to promote rule of law at a much wider scale. As part of psychological dimension of this warfare, Indian state must appear, benefactor and protector of all peace-loving people all over the world, including Pakistan itself who are suffering at the hands of perverse dispensation.  

    I have cautioned in one of my papers that an over-reliance on conventional military means and strategies, which do have critical but relatively smaller role, in irregular warfare, shall have consequences that, in long run, may leave an impact akin to a failure. In this context, the adversary is relying upon interoperability of its conventional and irregular war strategies. Hegemonic agenda of another power and apathy and disinterest of another is a formidable  challenge that India has to factor in.  

    Another paper on this very blog mentions that irregular warfare like insurgency, terrorism and subversion have no space for grand stratagem like conventional warfare. This shall drain out massive energies and resources for even minor successes. In long run, it can cripple all-round potential and capacities of any state and society. 

    Indian security forces and Indian people have shown exemplary resilience to fight this complex civilisational identity-driven war. They have made huge sacrifices. But there seems a clear gap in our institutional capacities and enormity or complexity of challenges. This is further exacerbated by our geography and a host of other factors. 

WHY MUST INDIA EXPLORE ROBUST PRINCIPLES OF STATECRAFT

    In today's interdependent world, governance and security cannot be divorced from each other. Similarly, internal and external security too share symbiotic relationship. We must remember that a reactive strategy that responds to a problem is bound to be deficient and expensive. 

    While there are no perfect prescription of success in irregular diffused wars, a good strategy must get better as it evolves. It must aspire to address issues in totality through focused, sharp and simple moves. It has to be economically, technologically and socially sustainable and capable of ensuring victory within a reasonable time.

    But a good leader and a good strategy in statecraft can evolve only through rigorous practice and investment of high-quality ideas. 

    A good practitioner of statecraft must have psyche and exposure of a soldier- with or without uniform- as well as a scholar in a wide variety of disciplines. 

    These include not merely science of warfare, strategy, geopolitics, governance and politics, but also a history of major powers, behavioural psychology and evolutionary psychology, human anthropology and a little bit of neuroanatomy and mathematics.

    This may sound ridiculous. But in today's world, enormous advancement of knowledge has made it possible to build a comprehensive and yet compact approach to governance and security. 

    In an integrated and interdependent world, amidst prevailing pace of technological and intellectual innovation, the destiny of entire world shall depend upon the quality of statecraft that some of the major powers are able to practice. This will require appropriate harnessing of advancements in knowledge, including wisdom of governance and security gleaned from experiences of practitioners, into concrete policies, strategies and actions.   

    Statecraft involves a more realistic evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of one's own state and its people. It is possible only if we can measure and compare the same more accurately with that of our adversaries, allies and even relevant neutral powers. This will also help a more realistic understanding of the overall context, including the larger geopolitical and security equilibrium. It will become easier to assess and anticipate the degree and direction of likely shifts in the competing, conflicting and collaborating priorities and capacities of relevant stakeholders. 

    A great state attempts to build right institutional architecture, where each component supplements or empowers the other through a process of continuous modifications, improvements and innovations.   

DERIVE INSPIRATION FROM THE PAST BUT BUILD A CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE OF STATECRAFT

     Every major power has its own unique strategic psyche. But probably none have the kind of humanist ethos inbuilt in their wider societal psyche as India. This is what explains our ability to sustain an open and competitive political system despite multiple constraints and pressures. However, the pace of de-Indianisation that India appears to be undergoing over the past few decades may erode this strength of ours without enabling us acquire any corresponding gain in return. 

    Nationalists in India harp a bit too much on our glorious past as a civilization. This feels more like a consolation in the context of our inability to build smarter principles and practices of governance, compared to our northern neighbour. 

    While we must derive inspiration from the past but it is more important to explore a contemporary science of statecraft to address our current and futuristic goals, needs, challenges and priorities as per our own unique context. We must remember that science of statecraft may take decades, generations and even centuries to build a momentum of rise and fall. It goes well beyond laws, history and academic knowledge to build visible and invisible principles of wisdom in governance and security.  

    India definitely boasted of probably the most robust culture of statecraft with utmost humanist orientations and goals at one point of time. That explains our cultural footprint in whole of Asia. But its decay and degeneration is corroborated by our sustained external occupation. 

    Today, our intelligentsia must scientifically deliberate upon possible factors that could have propelled our extra-ordinary rise as a state and civilisation. But it must also critically examine the possible factors that brought about our downfall from such zenith of material prosperity and intellectual advancement. A critical examination of strengths and deficiencies of the principles and practices of governance and statecraft - as we understand and interpret- in the given context may help us in devising more scientific postulates for future. But this is not possible for historians of previous era who could not go beyond a simple account of events.   

        Hence the principles and practices of statecraft that we envision for ourselves must dispassionately take into account our own unique identity, with our own distinct strengths and constraints, alongside our larger context, priorities, challenges and realistic goals.  

    We must specifically remember that prosperity of ancient India or social-cultural and intellectual advancement of that era stemmed not from religious rituals or social customs or even extra-ordinary wealth of Hindu rulers. Rather the material wealth and wisdom of that era must have resulted from the wisest principles, practices and traditions of statecraft, encompassing all dimensions of governance of society and state, including geopolitics, security and warfare.  

        If we attempt to interpret and analyse record of events with multiple prisms of a wide variety of disciplines to ascertain a realistic picture, it shall convince us that the opulence and wealth of medieval era rulers and elite, probably represented a decadent phase of ancient India. Yet the momentum of all round innovations and advancements that had resulted from solid principles of statecraft, that were re-created during pre-Christ Mauryan/Kautilyan/Chola era, was so strong that it took a long time for our military-strategic decline as a civilisation. What led to our annihilation and sustained humiliation, from the height of material and moral pinnacle, could be degeneration of those exceptional practices of statecraft.  

Post-independence India offered an excellent opportunity to resurrect a set of contemporary principles of statecraft be deriving inspirations from the past. But we have substantially failed to exploit this opportunity. 

CHINA'S ASSERTION OF ITS CIVILISATIONAL SUPERIORITY      

    Today, many Chinese scholars consider China to be the most superior civilizational state by virtue of: a) its sustained continuity, without any serious subjugation to any external force, over several millennia; b) its continuous territorial and cultural expansion; and c) its ability to enrich and empower itself in a very short time, especially compared to India, and without recourse to direct and brazen colonisation like the West. 

    This is considered attributable only to the strength of the unique principles of Chinese statecraft which are supposed to be integral to their civilisational values. Despite intermittent phases of stagnation and degeneration, they appear to have the highest degree of continuity in this unique science of their own version. By scientifically modernizing their civil service, which is oldest such continuing institution anywhere in the world, they are in much stronger position to translate their principles of statecraft into practice. 

    Its intellectuals and scholars, and even leaders, run down the West over the latter's shorter history and inbuilt flaws in their principles and practices of governance. They express optimism about their capacity to overtake the West and dominate the world on the basis of inherent strength of their so-called civilisational values or principles of state-craft. They seem to concede the intermittent degeneration in their stellar principles of statecraft in the history of whose the lowest point was the so-called century of humiliation from mid-19th century. Their current principles of statecraft appear to have arisen from an amalgamation or fusion of ideas varying from their own ancient thinkers and strategists to those from the other prominent ones from the West and Japan with clear imprint of Kautilya. 

    Nevertheless, China has its own unique persona as a state and society where deception, stealth and ruthlessness of the sovereign have  been acceptable instruments of state policy both at home and abroad. Western states and Arab world as well as Russia and South East Asia have with own respective model of state-craft, with significant fault lines in case of the first two. India in this context appears to have a reasonable structure with certain exceptional strengths but clear absence of a robust continuous principles of statecraft.   

INDIA'S ENORMOUS POTENTIAL ALONGSIDE FORMIDABLE CONSTRAINTS

    India's sustenance as a distinct civilisation and state despite centuries of external occupation, demonstrates its enormous potentials and strengths alongside formidable distortions and constraints. 

    What happens in future, no one can predict with absolute certainty or accuracy. Yet genuine statesmen and high-quality practitioners can still influence the course of further evolutionary journey of our own state as well as the global order. 

    We all know that a reactive or tactical approach to challenges, threats and opportunities can never lead to optimal results. Such an approach is rather reflective of deficient wisdom and poor resolve. 

    While no wisdom in statecraft can ever be perfect but an attempt to devise a dynamic and resilient institutional architecture of proactive governance can multiply capacities and output of any state. Today, there is greater unanimity that military and economic power are interdependent upon each other. Technology, innovation and intellectual prowess remains the key driver in both the spheres. Geopolitics and internal security appear more closely linked today than at any other point of time. 

    Peace and security- short of complacency, sloth and laze - are precondition for economic enterprise and progress. Smart law enforcement and efficient judiciary depend upon each other. Both can build a dynamic and effective criminal justice system only amidst a wider culture of integrity, social trust or social amiability where there is no space for identity-based divide and discord. Access to nutrition, sanitation, healthcare, awareness, education, economic and social security are all critical for building a high-quality citizenry, who constitute the most fundamental building block of a strong nation. Challenges of a society are formidable if it has faced colonial plunder and foreign occupation or even poor or oppressive governance for centuries. These subject substantial sections of citizens to sustained deprivation of nutrition and dignity for generations. These genetically erode the quality of population, including their cognitive capacities and even integrity behavioural patterns, 

    Only happy and cohesive families can raise healthy children that shall be less inclined towards criminality or less vulnerable to genetic disorders inducing anti-social behaviour. 

    No amount of court, lawyers, police and agencies can curb criminality and corruption if entire societal ecosystem is rigged to normalise corruption and deception as way of life. There are tons of data to establish each of the above hypotheses. 

  Hence, smart tactics is an indispensable necessity in national security. But in absence of a concurrent attempt to explore a larger all-encompassing and all-inclusive framework of governance, where each component empowers the other, the national security strategy of a major power is bound to fail. In my papers on national security and terrorism (National Security Outlook For India and   India: Need for An Indigeous Strategy on Terrorism) as well as various other write ups, I have explained the finer dynamics of the complexity of threats faced by India. 

    If India can produce a highly talented diaspora, there is no valid reason to doubt its capacity to devise the finest principles, practices and strategies of governance and security if its leadership is not too compromised or psychologically deranged. 

    Hence, this is time to explore a newer version of Indian statecraft by harnessing all our strength and accumulated wisdom. This has been my pet theme over past few decades even though my works have been repeatedly hacked and destroyed. 

    I have used the phrase Indocracy, because it envisions a unique fusion of ancient Indian values and principles with some of the contemporary Western ideals and practices with significant modifications and adaptations. These have the potential to accelerate the pace of both economic progress and social stability of India and others in the post-colonial world and yet offer an alternative model to stagnating and saturating model of the West.  

WHAT IS STATECRAFT?     

    Statecraft is and integrated science of governance and security that have evolved through practice rather than in libraries and classrooms. Its finer nuances are difficult to comprehend unless one has been a genuine practitioner and not a pretender or even simply a researcher and academic. All dimensions of governance and security cannot be documented and yet without solid academic and intellectual training none can be professional in any sphere. 

    The proof of strength of principles of statecraft lays in their ability to optimise economic and military prowess of a state on a sustained basis, where both the dimensions of power continuously supplement each other. It synthesizes strategy and tactics. It is able to build a sustainable synergy between state and society, where both empower each other to the optimal extent that is possible in a context. It is able to maintain an optimal synergy between external geopolitics and internal stability.   

    It is not about application of most brilliant ideas and strategies. It is more about devising and applying the ideas that could be most effective in a context. Clerical wisdom, moral intent and legal propriety have no space in this. Yet it must not appear to defy these for sake of wider credibility. From practical wisdom of statecraft must flow rules, regulations and laws. These must not restrain or restrict statecraft.      

    Robust principles and practices of statecraft take generations to evolve. It is derived from accumulated wisdom over generations in a wide variety of disciplines. 

Its practitioners need a unique neural circuitry and deep psychological conditioning to absorb and practice this wisdom. It is a science that needs continuous refinement and progressive evolution. Its practitioners must evolve within their life time and over generations. They need absolute personal integrity to continuously acquire and refine much deeper wisdom than what books and academics in this sphere can offer.  

           A sound institutional capacity of statecraft helps in more accurate understanding or assessment of internal dynamics of state and society as well as the external dynamics of the world. This helps in outlining or identifying wider priorities of governance and national security as well as acquiring capacities to pursue these optimally. 

Sadly, our academic regime or societal ecosystem are not geared to produce a large enough pool of potential practitioners of this science. An inbuilt institutional capacity to prevent, preempt and win wars, or resolve conflict, without eroding our overall strength, is indicator of the highest possible quality of statecraft. 

    A sound principle of statecraft aims at not only building such governance apparatuses but also generating such social and cultural habits that can sustain an efficient governance apparatus. 

WAR-WINNING CAPACITY: AN INTEGRAL COMPOENT OF STATECRAFT

    Military defeats and external occupation substantially change course of events. These destroy not only a state but also the society and alter wider psyche of state and society by influencing behavioural pattern people. Though we do not have adequate scientific data, but it would be clear that the phenomenon of, what psychologists describe, neuroplasticity must be inducing long-term anatomical changes over generations. This must be profoundly altering both strategic and societal psyche of states, civilisations and societies. This proposition is profoundly perceptible if we analyse course of history of major civilisations.    

    But a poorly fought war, where victories are secured at exorbitant and unsustainable costs, may also lead to consequences that may not be too different from defeat. Hence, science of statecraft has to focus on building the finest possible strategies and capacities of warfare. Wars and conflicts can never be avoided. But it is ability to anticipate all dimensions of warfare and deal with the same has to be a key focus of statecraft. But can this capacity be acquired by simply academic reading? 

    While there is no justification for war, a great state has to keep fighting low-cost and high-impact smaller wars - for greater good of larger number of people. This is the biggest laboratory for practical experiment of powerful ideas and strategies. These, in the context of states and societies, require continuity over generations. An impregnable defence for the core of the state and its key institutions is critical for the same. Similarly, far more effort, integrity and commitment is required to protect and refine this science. Is this the reason that China has been expanding? Where newly annexed territories can continuously expand the ring of security for itself? Is this the reason, it is intermittently involved in low-cost conflicts? Does this phenomenon explain what appears a strong elitist culture, alongside focus on integrity for incumbents at the highest echelons of CCP? 

    We cannot say that with certainty. But the manner in which it has fused its economic, technological, military and geopolitical capacities and goals point towards a very clear design. Details and examples are being deliberately avoided.   

    Simultaneously, specific detailed recommendations are being held back by the author. 

    Warfare has multiple dimensions. Besides, raw military prowess and capabilities to overwhelm adversaries, a state also needs to deploy a wide variety of direct and indirect means, to maintain military edge over adversaries. This may involve not merely optimising its own strength but also crippling strengths and capacities of its real and potential adversaries. A robust institutional apparatus also creates bigger space for smarter tactics and battle strategies.  This includes deft management of psyche of friends, allies, adversaries and even neutral forces. 

    Thats why the smartest principles and practices of warfare lead to victories with minimum resistance or at minimal material and human costs.         

    Advancements and innovation in a wide variety of wisdom have made it possible to build a mutually empowering equilibrium among various components of governance and security, including warfare. This requires a sustainable synergy between state and society where both empower each other.  It is possible to pursue these by deploying a wide variety of scientifically tested tactics and strategies to continuously shape systems and psyches not only domestically but even externally. But efficacy of these ideas shall be tested only on their application in real situations. Yet there should be no confusion that very attempt to explore building such a science shall catapult our governance and security output to new heights. But psychologically we are being pushed in opposite direction. A distributive approach to wealth on the basis of caste and other identities can be the surest route to destroy any society and state.           

NO SPACE FOR PAROCHIALISM IN INDIAN STATECRAFT 

    Indian statecraft cannot have any space for any form parochialism, including Hindu parochialism, as response to Islamic radicalism that has been threatening it. 

Simultaneously, radicalism or identity driven hate in name of Islam is probably the biggest threat that the Indian statecraft has to address. This is for the sake of security of not only Indians but entire one fourth of human race inhabiting Indian subcontinent as well as people in whole of Asia and beyond. 

    Xenophobic radicalism has potential to generate such hysterical frenzy that may destroy its adherents and opponents both without any discrimination.   

    Xenophobic values and practices may have become part of neural circuitry of people in certain parts of the world, depending upon evolutionary course of certain people in certain geographical regions. Certain societal or cultural practices may have evolved in response to threats to bolster internal cohesion of the communities that may have reinforced this xenophobia over generations.  

    Unusual cohesion among male only gangs alongside a high degree of misogyny appears logical in these cultures. Such behavioral patterns are not restricted homo Sapien alone. Many other hominids are known for practices akin to genocidal hate and misogyny. Even though people and cultures have evolved but some of these patterns get so hardwired in neural circuitry over generations that these may get triggered even after centuries.  As faiths and cultures originate in such regions and spread, these values and practices also spread.      

    There are a large number of studies that suggest that some of the Islamic rituals, which people across geographies have been following are nothing but a cocktail of pre-medieval Arabic, Mongol and Hittite practices. Observance of some of these practices have the potential to trigger violent parochialism. Simultaneously, over long run these can induce such genetic alterations that may make people more vulnerable to xenophobia, genocidal parochialism and misogyny. This is a much deeper and complex issue and I shall be writing separately on the same. 

    But at the same time, what is heartening that higher number of progressive Islamic statesmen are slowly renouncing parochialism and pushing their societies out of it.    

    Today, when an effort is being made to denounce Muslims by the so-called Hindu scholars, who ritualistically quote distorted version of some of our scriptures, they appear to be building a counter-narrative to Islamic radicalism by aping xenophobic parochialism identified with Islam. Since 99% human DNA or genome is common, people may adopt some of these values over years but any attempt to Arabise Hindus, or even most Muslims of India or the subcontinent, is neither viable nor  desirable. 

 My independent research, outside public glare, convinces me beyond all reasonable confusions that that it was decay and disruption of the ancient Indian principles of statecraft that saw descent of Islamist aggressors, incorporating West Asian xenophobic values and practices, not only  on the frontiers of Indian subcontinent or deep inside in it.  

A prosperous and advanced India should have worked harder with higher integrity to practice and promote its eternally wise and sagacious science of statecraft with an eternally humanistic orientation. This would have enabled them to venture into Arab and West Asian lands in the same way as they did in the orient. Somewhere our traditions, culture, ethos and values of statecraft lost their virility and resilience. These succumbed to human frailties. It may have been collective failure of many to restraint power and authority by higher injunctions of Dharma. Or it could be a cyclical phase of decline from which we have not been able to emerge.  

NUTURING OF ISLAMIC RADICALISM SINCE EARLY 20TH CENTURY FOR GEOPOLITICAL GOALS OF THE WEST

    There are many indicators that suggest that Islamic radicalism could have been raised and nurtured by the Western imperialist forces from early 20th century as larger weapon of security and geopolitics. Genocidal partition of the subcontinent to overthrow of Mosaddegh in Iran or later raising of Taliban through Pakistan or sustained patronization of a Wahabi Saudi Arabia, that exported radical Islam, until Bin Laden phenomenon, are only a few examples in this direction.

    The objective could have been subjugating liberals in Muslim societies who aspired to assert their national and cultural interests independent of the West. It is known fact that military dispensations and fanatic autocrats were dependable supplicants in larger geopolitical game. Simultaneously, it could have been the most effective weapon for crippling the biggest post-colonial state and the largest democracy of the world that was refusing to throw destiny of its people larger agenda of any particular super power. The course of events have been probably far too complex as position of various actors have also been constantly shifting to various degrees. 

    Probably, it requires prism of eternal Indian statecraft to evaluate it objectively from a humanist and empathetic perspective. Failure of Asian and Indian statecraft to align their objectives has crippled optimal potential of this region and beyond. 

Geopolitics over the last several millennia has mostly been a zero-sum game for all major powers. These have only intensified in recent centuries. Major powers always sought to exploit gaps and fissures within the systems and societies of each other to cripple, weaken and dent and eventually subjugate each other until the second world-war when only two major powers were left on the global horizon. Lots have changed since then proving the cliche that there are no permanent friends in the international arena.  

    Certain strands of ancient Indian statecraft must have had the singular distinction of treating the entire planet as one common entity until degeneration of this science and wider debilitation of political authority structures. This is again an ocean where cannot get sucked into. 

    What is more important that India, given it identity and context, has to destroy any form of radicalism and parochialism. Any tactless or reckless attempt to politically profiteer from the issue or a legal-clerical approach shall boomerang in medium term and inflict severe damages in long run to both India and rest of the humanity.  

    Stakeholders of India need to be very clear in their mind that India cannot be, or must never be, equated with or brought to the same level as Pakistani elite. The latter are a bunch of irresponsible or cancerous elements acting as geopolitical tool of larger external global powers. To demonstrate their utility to others, their elite keep ranting about their separate ancestry and racial identity. They have radicalised and subverted their own society to demonstrate their utility to further the agenda of major external forces. They have demonstrated total lack any commitment to their own people and society or any vision of long-term governance, peace and security in this region. Their activities and outlook, if left unchecked, threaten the entire human race, including their patrons at one or the other point of time. 9/11 attacks in US and current social turmoil in Europe is a testimony to the same. 

    Fortunately, few sagacious rulers within the Muslim world have seen through the entire game. They are taking measures to liberalise and humanise their socities. Yet they realise that they cannot overturn social practices and cultural values overnight. Their task as well as that of the right-thinking people across all divides is going to be very tough. 

ROAD TO FUTURE

As a state and civilisation, India continues to demonstrate not only strategic myopia but also inability to resurrect those ethos, values and wisdom of statecraft for which we still seem to have immense potential. Instead of preaching or expecting the world to change or act sympathetically towards us, India needs concrete capacity to eradicate xenophobic radicalism in name of Islam. Any attempt to foster counter-parochialism or tolerate obscurantist practices or divisive rituals in name of Hinduism shall be counter-productive or shall retard our overall capacities. 

We remain a moot spectator to weaknesses within our systems and psyche in absnece of smarter principles of statecraft. It requires courage, innovation and integrity to refine systems and shape not only our own wider societal psyche but even that of people around us.  

Military prowess, alone can never be in a position to shape internal and external ambience of a sate. Soft-power in itself is inadequate for pursuit of larger goals unless backed by all shades of hard power and economic, technological and intellectual prowess to sustain the same. Hence, what India as to attempt developing a combination of soft and hard powers on sustained basis with all-round capacities to sustain the same. There are no easy solutions in this direction. And I am not inclined to share any concrete details on the same in an open paper.   

    However, there can never be fixed and simple formulas and clear strategies in this direction. No academic training can ever build a robust science of statecraft anywhere. But no individual can also be sole repository of wisdom in this sphere. This is why great states ought to build a secret science of statecraft and ensure its continuity by building a large pool of practitioners, who alone can turn into innovators.  

Any attempt by the Western powers to resurrect Islamic radicalism to deepen social divide on any pretext is dangerous not only for India but the entire world. Human race may have succeeded in containing terrorism in name of Islam to a much higher degree had they handled the entire issue going beyond tactical military, legal and bureaucratic framework. A deficient handling of the issue has ensured that radicalism remains alive and kicking in many parts of the world. It is still potent threat in India and beyond. 

The counter-reaction in the form of Hindu parochialism up to a certain degree may have helped in exerting a degree of pressure on Islamist radicals. But beyond a certain point it helps provide fuel to them for propaganda. Newton’s third law comes into play in any case. 

India's stakeholders must appreciate that the biggest partners in our fight against Islamic radicalism have to be sane Muslims. This is both within India and abroad. Radical frenzy shall eventually fail to differentiate between friends and foes and hence statesmen and leaders would be committing the biggest harakiri on behalf of their states if they succumb to this monster on whatever considerations.    

    But unlike scientists who experiment ideas and bring about innovations in controlled laboratories, practitioners and innovators in the science of statecraft have a tough challenge. World itself is a laboratory for them. Their day today actions and strategies alone are their experiments. Controlling the state is not sufficient. It is the fire to bring about the change shall give momentum to their experiments. 

    Ironically, there is no individual credit for innovators in science of statecraft. History remembers leaders and rulers. Real innovators in this science remain nameless, faceless and unknown. I still have faith in eternal values of India, which have not entirely been wiped out, despite all oppression and coercion by external forces and their compromised proxies hiding within our systems. 

    Resurrection of the wisdom of the noblest principles of ancient Indian statecraft, going beyond all rituals, nostalgia or narcissism, is probably the biggest promise of hope for people of South Asia and beyond. It appears quit dim, but not dead, at this point of time. 

WAQF AMENDMENT, SOCIAL COHESION AND INDIAN STATECRAFT

WAQF CONTROVERSY: EXPANDING CHASM OF  EMOTIONS

Controversy around Waqf Amendment Act refuses to die down. Nation-wide protests continue to persist. A host of Muslim groups have been mobilising the community against the Act through emotive appeals.  

Most of the Anti-Waqf Act protests have remained peaceful. But the protest in West Bengal has been particularly violent. Officially only 3 persons have been killed and over 150 are injured. But more importantly, there has been a mass exodus of Hindus from certain Muslim dominated areas, especially Murshidabad. houses and shops have been burned down. Gangs of Muslim youth have attacked Hindu families in several neighborhoods. The actual figure of casualties or people impacted in the disturbances may be higher. Even in Tripura, scores of policemen have been injured. Emotive protests and stray incidents of violence have surfaced in many parts of the country. 
As per media reports, Muslim groups have filed 73 petitions in the Supreme Court of India. Though the entire Act has not been stayed, the court has granted major reliefs to the community, restraining the Govt from de-notifying the properties under occupation of Waqf Boards. 

But irrespective of all other issues, the controversy has managed to polarize emotions, fracturing our already fractured social cohesion. Even a former Muslim Chief Election Commissioner, who has always been measured in his utterances, has described Act as an attempt to grab Muslim lands.  Similarly, most Hindu nationalist groups have been equally vociferous in condemning those opposing the recently amended Act. One MP has gone to the extent of blaming Chief Justice of India for internal turmoil in the country over this issue.  Such disappearance of sanity or sense of responsibility from public spaces of India is dangerous for long-term health and well-being of Indian state and society. 

SYMPTOM OF DEEPER UNDERLYING MALAISE?

    The Waqf act in the previous format, especially after 2013, was definitely vulnerable to abuse. It offered a virtual license to Waqf Boards of the country to grab both private and public lands. The boards itself were vulnerable to take-over by land mafia and organized criminals through their proxies. This was especially given the overall dysfunctionality of Indian criminal justice system. 

But probably the Govt seems to possess neither the credibility to persuade the Indian Muslims nor the technical and professional capacities to smoothly handle a contentious issue like this. 

Communication is one of the most difficult sciences and a complex art. Confrontation always backfires. Only a unique cocktail of persuasion and pressure can push through a big idea like amendment or even abolition of Waqf Board and communalism or covert war in its disguise. A sagacious leadership, adept at the art of communication, can push through something like this with minimal use of force, if it is driven by the objectives of governance and security of society, rather than exploiting fissures within the society for political gains. 

Certain sections of Muslim intelligentsia and civil society groups have come out in support of the Act. But by and large, substantial sections of Muslim population are opposed to the recent amendment in the Waqf Act. Nevertheless, approach of this minority among the Muslim community is a silver-lining amidst this larger atmosphere of despair and hopelessness on front of societal cohesion and radicalisation of the community. Hence the trust of this section of Muslim intelligentsia and masses- who are opposing Islamic radicalism out of their commitment to eternal values, ethos and symbols of this country- in the Indian systems must be protected under all circumstances. 

Given the unique identity and geopolitics of India, the option of identity driven parochialism in name of Hinduism does not exist for any sane Govt in this country. At the same time, those who are abetting Islamist parochial sentiments are certainly playing with fire and threatening security of the country.  

Some of the hardline Muslim clerics and Islamist politician have found the Waqf controversy a Godsend opportunity to make a political capital out of it or consolidate their grip over their community. Some of opponents of Waqf Act also face charges of ingenious methods of grabbing land and resources in name of the community only for their private enrichment and personal empowerment. But would that have been possible without gaps in our institutions and larger weaknesses in our regulatory capacities or criminal justice system? 

SEEING THE ISSUE FROM PERSPECTIVE OF NATIO NAL SECURITY:

These elements have left no stone unturned to describe the recently amended Waqf Act as attack on their religion and its practices. However, the charter of Waqf is restricted only to charity and social welfare through assets or properties donated to Waqf Board. The entire controversy arises from the fact that in the prevailing atmosphere of fragile institutions and societal distrust, there is a strong perception that a lot of these properties were unlawfully grabbed in the name of religion. Some of the so-called Waqf boards in states have been making preposterous claims over public and private properties. Simultaneously, there is little or no check over abuse of these properties for private gains. 

Many see a red flag situation when the Waqf Act of 2013 was brought in. It appeared extension of larger civilisational war in name of Islam. It offered unrestrained powers to Waqf Boards to claim any land and there was effectively no redress, given the sluggish pace of our judiciary and near impossibility of getting justice from most Indian courts. There are strong indicators that suggest that efficiency and integrity of Indian courts have been deliberately rigged as part of larger disguised war.   

Even at height of terrorism in the name of Islam, there were senior functionaries of Indian state who were painting the monster of so-called Hindu terrorism. This narrative had reached far and wide within the international community. The world had started talking about the dangers of Hindu terrorism without any logical basis. But any counter-terrorism professional would know that without a global network of organised crime groups, state support and sanctuaries across regions and wider supply of violently brought up youthful population, no organised terrorism is possible in name of any faith. 

Hindu hardline groups lacked all of the above. Of course, when state was failing to contain the threat of Islamic terrorism, and many among secularist political formation appeared to encourage or abet this war against unarmed and defenceless civilians, there was some counter-reaction from some stray Hindu groups. However these must not have been tolerated and yet these fell way short of terrorism.  

What happened subsequently is history. Victory of PM Modi led political forces, with backing of RSS, stemmed the ascendance of Islamist forces. But the threat has not been eradicated. In fact, organised criminals and their collaborators hiding within the system appear to continue to target some of the top professionals who could threaten them. Both the executive and the courts have been moot spectators, if not active collaborators, in such covert and indirect assault on capacity of Indian state to fight back and subjugate forces of radicalism and organised crime.

This only reflects the enormity of covert prowess and capacity for clandestine warfare developed by radical groups on Indian soil. Under patronage of various invisible and opaque global entities, they have relentlessly waged an unrestricted, all out and all-pervasive warfare targeting our systems, societies and psyche.

It is important that this war is fought smartly and won at sustainable costs. This must not be done for the sake of establishing the so-called supremacy of any faith or identity over the or the rest. Hindu counter-reaction to Islamic radicalism is not the solution. But effective security to citizens and integrity of all our institutions is critical for wider peace, security and prosperity of people not only within our borders but in this region and even beyond. 

Hence, every tactical effort has to be made to deny opportunity to anyone to use Waqf controversy to peddle any divisive agenda, it is important that we ensure integrity, dynamism and resilience of all our institutions of governance to safeguard our security as a nation.                                                                                             (1700 words approx)

                                                         

NEED TO APPROACH THE ISSUE WITH TACT 

If we carefully examine the Waqf controversy, especially the tone and tenor of certain hardline Muslim clerics and politicians, they may appear to be fracturing our social cohesion. But so may be their counterparts from the Hindu hardline side. Irresponsible statements are no substitute for firm state action and responsible social initiatives to eradicate Islamic radicalism. 

Identity is an emotive and delicate issue. An identity driven issue needs be handled with utmost tact and caution involving appropriate degree of pressure and persuasion, which varies as per context. 

    Indian state needs to approach the threat of Islamic divisive identity from its eternally humanistic ethos of statecraft rather than clerical and legal approach. Any effort to ape the hardliners on the Islamist side by creating a lobby of Hindu parochialists shall be too counter-productive. There may not be simplistic black and white solutions in this direction. 

Imposition of 2013 version of the Act appeared an extension of identity driven war against India. A reckless handling of the matter shall have same negative consequences for our social cohesion. Probably what may be missing here could be overall crisis of credibility of the ruling dispensation among the Muslim community. This is an unfortunate and unavoidable dimension of our political equilibrium. 

Govt's focus on Waqf appears has also faced criticism for its misplaced priorities. There is lot of substance in the contention that India should have given priority to drastic overhaul in its criminal justice system as well as our entire social, political and administrative ecosystem. With repeated exposure of corruption in higher echelons of judiciary and virtual break down in justice delivery mechanism of the state, amidst instances of brazen poor governance and normalization of corruption and dishonesty, no amendment or enactment is going to be effective.  Hence more than anything, we need a larger consensus and tact to push for major reforms rather than clerical management of situation.  

WAQF AS A PRETEXT TO RAKE UP IDENTITY-DRIVEN DIVIDE

How critical is Waqf or Auqaf as part of Muslim religious practice is debatable. The history of an Act on Waqf properties in India is barely a little over hundred years old. Waqf was more of an informal tradition rather than an institutionalised and integral component of religion. Many see it as extension of Zakat or charity after the life time. Many donors of Waqf  have been non-Muslims in the past. Whether the beneficiaries of these properties, especially in a multi-religious or multi-identity society should only be Muslims is also debatable. The same applies to religious and welfare properties of members of other faith. When it comes to charity, the beneficiaries must be need driven. Any attempt to create separate enclaves for members of different faiths shall only fracture our cohesion.

I doubt that any Gurudwaras or even older temples that feed needy differentiate people on the basis of identity. Their beneficiaries cut across identity divides. Nevertheless, no beneficiary should condemn the benefactor and no benefactor should discriminate among beneficiaries. In a multi-religious and multi-cultural society and state like ours, there must be few members of other faiths in every welfare or charitable body run by members of other faith. This will bolster larger inter-community amiability, trust and cohesion.

NEED FOR A BI-PARTISAN DISCOURSE ON ISLAMIC RADICALISM

What is worrying that political polarisation over the issue Waqf is not about an Act but the larger space that we are ceding as society to Islamic radicalism. This is especially given our own social, political and larger geopolitical context.

Opposition parties are opposed to the Act over political considerations rather than merit of the Act. They derive big strength from their near monopoly over Muslim votes that account for a sizeable proportion of the electorate. Ruling party has a legitimate argument that for the same of this constituency, they have been helping the monster of radicalism raise its head and annihilate our society. They may not be entirely correct but may not be completely off the mark either.  

Hindu votes have never been politically cohesive until the current ruling dispensation succeeded in mobilising a majority of them to create a winning formula for itself. They know that hard core Hindu votes are never going to desert the ruling party. The entire contest shall be confined to floating votes among Hindus, some of which may migrate to opposition over frustration with bad governance and sheer anti-incumbency sentiments. 

There is a popular perception that irrespective of all considerations, overwhelming majority Muslim votes shall always remain opposed to the ruling party.   Hence the political fault-lines appear unbridgeable. 

Given the larger distrust of the Muslim community towards the ruling party, and consistently confrontational approach of the latter, filled with direct stoking of anti-Muslim sentiments, the overwhelming majority of this community shall always remain suspicious of the ruling dispensation. Of course, the underlying issues for the same may be far too complex. 

But there appears a credible logic in the allegation that the action of the ruling dispensation is neither aimed at remedying the gaps in the Waqf management nor in eradication of Islamic radicalism from India and beyond. It is also somewhat defensive and tentative on entire issue, despite passing the Act. 

The distrust is not confined to one between the Govt and Muslim community alone. It persists even between the Govt and opposition of India. The two appear to share such an association of irreconcilable squabble and distrust that one worries that our political class may struggle to act cohesively even on the most critical issues of national security and governance.  

SOCIETAL AND NATIONAL COHESION ARE SACRED 

Here the issues at stake are more than mere an Act. Societal cohesion of India has always been under threat over this identity divide.  But the present discord over Waqf Act is going to further fracture this social divide. Any attempt to address the issue by coercion, propaganda and subversion or manipulation of institutions – instead of sophisticated cerebral capacity to nudge the society through finest principles of statecraft, relying upon deft management of mass psychology- shall be counter productive. 

Governance and statecraft are not the domains of weak-hearted or power-drunk with capacity to coerce and subvert. It is also not the domain of clerical or legal geniuses.

Credibility is most important tool of communication. It is the capacity to assess and persuade the critical segment of the stakeholders that constitutes the bedrock of statecraft. India's entire political-governance system is suffering from various shades of dysfunctionality and subversion.

Waqf Amendment Act was very much required. What is more important that all issues are tactfully addressed in manner that involves minimum resistance. Probably, we have ignored certain more critical areas and issues that still require greater focus and attention.

There is no substitute to sustained and serious reforms in all our key institutions to optimize their all-round output. To build a better synergy among individuals and societies. This is a broad concept. Its details need to be consistently worked out and evolved, using ingenuity of leaders and doers.  

(Edited)

NATIONAL SECURITY OUTLOOK OF INDIA: NEED FOR A PARADIGM SHIFT

[At this juncture of history, India faces a predicament that probably very few big powers or civilizations may have faced in their entire journey. Its potentials and opportunities to rise as a major global power are entwined with formidable challenges. India’s rise as a  global super power can be the biggest possible antidote to both Islamic radicalism as well as opaque authoritarianism. But impediments - both internal as well as external – in this direction could be far too daunting]

NEED FOR A PARADIGM SHIFT

India has long ignored the complexity of its own geopolitical context, internal governance contradictions and the gravity of combined identity-driven threats from its two hostile nuclear armed neighbors. One of them is known as the epicenter of terror and patron of organised crime in this pat of the world and beyond. The other has emerged as a super power but has traditionally trampled upon its own masses and rampaged nearly all its neighbors. Military-controlled state power structure has thrived in Pakistan on congenital hatred towards Hindus and non-Muslims, whereas China cites its civilizational superiority to justify forcible and stealthy grab of territory and resources of people in the neighborhood and beyond. Both resort to destabilization and subversion of institutions of open and transparent societies as part of their larger strategic objectives.

Amidst these, India’s long history of internal political decay, external occupation and colonial legacies have left their own after-effects. India is still battling these despite freedom and democracy. Distortion in larger values and overall mass psyche has had a crippling impact on collective capacities of people, notwithstanding multiple instances of individual brilliance. These have been impeding rise and sustenance of healthy and robust governance institutions. Notwithstanding the strength and resilience of original Indian values, which have sustained democracy in India even under most adverse circumstances, the country faces an uphill task of securing its legitimate national security interests.

 The so-called ultra-nationalist position of India’s two hostile neighbours- that hinges substantially on anti-India sentiments, albeit to varying degrees and in varying forms - has helped opaque and authoritarian regimes in these countries consolidate their grip on the state power structures. In the name of Islam and Han nationalism respectively, they have decimated their political opponents, suppressed political dissent, denied liberty to their people and yet bolstered their political legitimacy. However, China’s efficient administrative apparatus has ushered in spectacular economic transformation. It has risen on back of excruciating labour of its work force and performance driven meritocratic bureaucratic structure accountable to the political authority rather than people.

 Chinese governance model has won endorsement of large sections of people at home and admiration of many abroad. Cohesion and efficiency of its governance apparatus to respond to any crises or extra ordinary situation has been manifest in its handling of Covid crisis. Unfettered by any concern for human costs, Chinese governance institutions can act more decisively, swiftly and flexibly than most democracies. However, its authoritarian structures poses as much threat to global security as the Military backed and crime driven establishment of Pakistan.

 China’s intent and capacity of strategic domination of the region, and beyond, is reflected in the quality and trajectory of its military-security advancements and innovations. These have been backed by a unique model of economic development that rests on secure and somewhat monopolistic access to resources and markets. China has successfully fused economic agenda with its security  objectives. Hence, control of strategic points on land and similarly significant sea lanes of communication become unavoidable to secure the markets and resources, which in turn fuel and fund the military-security innovations and capacities. Chinese state has developed appropriate military and non-military defensive and offensive capacities as part of its larger strategic design. It has inducted an array of highly sophisticated short and intermediate range hypersonic weapon systems, advanced stealth weapons including fighter jets, stronger Air and Satellite defence systems, as well as massive Information Surveillance Reconnaissance (ISR) infrastructure.

Some of these weapons systems appear capable of breaching the air defence systems of even the US bases in the region and blind both their satellite and under-water observation capacities in this parts of the world. These appear to have made China’s own defences in the region nearly impregnable. Simultaneously, its major push for naval expansion has not merely fortified its defensive capacities but also enhanced its reach way beyond its frontiers. In last 10 years, China has put more vessels in the Sea than most major powers combined. During the same period, it has also conducted more tests for hypersonic weapon delivery systems than even the United States. It has not merely bridged the gap in many of the conventional weapon systems but also built advantages in short and intermediate range offensive and defensive weapon systems. These have enhanced vulnerability of India as well as all states in Asia.

 Chinese assertiveness towards the United States has been accompanied by a bellicosity towards nearly all countries in the region, except its known lackeys. It has appeared particularly intolerant to any possibility of challenge to its supremacy in this region, which India alone is in a position to pose. Hence, it has encouraged and abetted Pakistani sponsored covert war against its democratic neighbour, which is manifest in its determined defence of Pakistani terror proxies like Hafiz Syed and Masood Azhar and unequivocal support on Kashmir. It has also exploited transparency, and even somewhat fragility, of India’s regulatory institutions to clandestinely pillage the latter’s economy through its advantages in trade and technology. Its transgressions on the Indian border need to be seen in this context. 

India’s internal governance institutions, notwithstanding their resilience and strength, appear inadequately prepared to face these challenges. This is especially given the existing pressures of meeting basic needs of large population amidst deficient resources like land and water. Lack of political consensus on key issues and social fracture simply compounds challenges in this direction.

 

PREVAILING DYNAMICS

     Successive Indian governments have always been cognizant of the gravity of the combined Pak-China threat as well as deficiencies of domestic governance institutions. However, strategic preparation towards dealing with these challenges has appeared inadequate. India seems to have ignored the threat from internal power dynamics of Pakistan, especially the way its society and state have evolved. These make it nearly impossible for large sections of Pakistani people to peacefully co-exist with India. Sustained radicalization of Pak society has been accompanied with increasing grip of deep state over levers of state power. Intensified domestic and international propaganda against India, and especially Hindus, has not only created a stronger political support base for the ruling syndicate but also helps raise an unconventional army of terrorists, criminals and radicalized clerics for an unconventional and indirect all out covert war against India. Radicalisation of youth at home and abroad, through chosen cronies, as well as support and patronage to organised crime have helped strengthen instruments of covert war against India.

 Economies of scale have forced this infrastructure to turn global and a significant component of terror and radical groups have also slipped out of their direct control. Nevertheless, they have retained control over a larger number of these through a blanket curb on civil society and dismantling any progress towards rule of law or transparency in criminal justice system. Such an arrangement enables the ruling syndicate to retain a strong control over the territory of Pakistan, as well as substantial parts of Afghanistan, in conjunction with their terror proxies like Taliban and Haqqani network. However, possibility of a large-scale turmoil in that country remains a reality, as the process of splintering of multiple groups and factions is inevitable in long run. It will have to be seen how Chinese deal with such situation to guard their investments in that country.  

The very dynamics of the existing power structure in Pakistan has necessitated building a formidable network of global terror, crime and subversion. They have propped up and sponsored some such groups on their own but also built up linkages with many of the existing ones.  These extend from South East Asia to India to Africa to Europe and going all the way to South America. Besides terror in  the region beyond, Pakistani footprint has been more than visible in nearly all shades of organised global crime. These vary from drug trafficking, counterfeiting of currency, money laundering to extortion, betting and bribing networks to street crime among others. All of these can be used as potent tools of subversion as well as garnering illegitimate clout.

During cold-war era when West was using Islamic radicalism as a strategic tool to counter communism, Pakistan sold its services to these powers. But over the past few 2-3 decades, it has drifted to the Chinese communist regime helping it reach out to influential elements both in the Muslim world as well as some of the Western countries. Chinese patronage of Pakistan’s subversive activities in India is widely believed to be aimed at obstructing accelerated march of the World’s biggest democracy to economic prosperity or stronger internal cohesion. Pakistani clout with the drug-crime networks in the Western world has also enhanced its clout and even utility for them. They have traditionally been believed to be collaborators in West's counter-terror strategies, despite backstabbing them by shetering some one like Osama Bin Laden among others. 

Many western powers have appeared reluctant to antagonise Pakistan beyond a certain point. This was evidenced in a fairly soft approach of nearly all major powers in Asia-Pacific Group (APG) on Countering Terror Finance (CTF) on brazen defiance of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) guidelines by Pakistan. Hence, it is doubtful that even a near global outcry against Pakistan for its collusion, support, patronage and sponsoring of terror, as well as organised crime, may result in commensurate tangible actions. 

In fact, complicity in terror and crime has appeared to offer a significant clout to Pakistani ruling syndicate. This has been amply manifested in their facilitation of US-Taliban agreement in Afghanistan, besides their so-called support in counter-terror investigations and policies. In a fluid geopolitical situation, Pakistan remains a possible conduit even for a potential deal between the West and China in future. India needs to be alive to such possibilities, especially in tighter situations where choices could be limited. Several elements even in the Western political and security establishments could reconcile to the idea of restricting the Chinese domination of Asia and confining Pakistani activities in this region.

The cost of confrontation with China continues to escalate for the West and so does the dismantling of Pakistani terror- crime network . India has to come out with innovative strategies and stronger institutional capacities to curb both expanding asymmetry of power with China as well as crush the covert war from Pakistan at minimal cost and within a reasonable time-frame. A stronger governance reforms that integrate security priorities with complementary economic and technological objectives would be indispensable.

Diplomatic support and international goodwill do constitute a critical ingredient of national power but given the fluidity of geopolitical equations in general, these do not always translate into tangible and dependable strengths.  Unconditional military-security support appears extremely difficult if other parties do not have an equally abiding stake on issues at stake, or if their gains are not commensurate with the risks involved. With onset of an inward-looking United States that has withdrawn from several of its international treaty obligations, the entire global equilibrium has become a little more uncertain. Major international powers cannot afford to risk their core national security interests on international goodwill and shelve plans and opportunities to empower themselves on their own. 

With relative erosion in economic and technological supremacy of the United States, and increasing assertion of China, India is left with no other option but to pursue an agenda of transformation of its economic, technological and governance capacities more seriously. These alone can sustain a proactive strategy to deter hostile intents and actions of actual and potential adversaries.  India will have to shun its inward-looking approach to engage, influence and shape issues and events beyond its frontiers to safeguard its core interests. It must do so at minimum military-economic costs. This would require building comprehensive defensive and offensive capacities with the highest possible levels of innovation in every sphere.

India’s defence forces have displayed the highest standards of professionalism and bravery in protecting legitimate military interests of the country. However, political-bureaucratic and corporate institutions, notwithstanding few notable exceptions, have struggled to provide a stronger economic, technological and social support in this direction. Inability of these institutions to harness existing tangible and intangible resources into comprehensive national strength is manifest in the prevailing asymmetry of similarly sized China that had a somewhat identical background until half a century back.

Inability of several of our governance institutions to perform optimally or respond decisively and swiftly to emergent challenges, has been worrying. The ongoing Covid pandemic has already tested our capacity to handle an epidemic or natural calamity of a large scale or secure food-water-energy-communication needs of a massively expanding population over long run. With depleting resources like land and water, the challenge is going to be increasingly formidable.

Given the enormity of the security and geopolitical challenges facing India, the pace of its economic-technological-governance advancements have appeared fairly slow and sluggish, with deficient levels of innovation. Post-independence India has contained many of its internal feuds and fissures quite well but its larger national cohesion has remained under stress. This is both due to deficient criminal justice system as well as poorly regulated political competition. These, in turn, have been undermining optimal industry, enterprise and social stability, resulting in sub-par economic development as well as sub-optimal technological innovations.

 These together with sloth and inefficiency in large sections of bureaucracy have eroded overall competitiveness of Indian economy in a globalised world. With competitiveness in trade and advantages in technology acting as lethal tools of depredation, something for which war was required in the earlier era, India cannot afford such a situation. Despite some enclaves of excellence and stellar accomplishments of Indians outside India, there is need for serious improvement in overall quality and productivity of all institutions of governance. This will not be possible without transformation in the larger social and economic ecosystems.

AN OPTIMAL BUT NOT AN ABSOLUTE SECURITY COVER

While no country can practically obtain an absolute level of national security, which is not worth even the labour and pain, but every major power has to optimise sum-total of its institutional capacity to prevent, preempt and deter both real and potential conflicts. Such capacity must be sustainable and conflicts and challenges must be addressed in a manner that does not erode long-term potential and capacities of the nation. India’s progress in this direction has remained inadequate largely due to: a) formidable nature of geopolitical challenges; and b) inherent and inbuilt constraints of some of the existing governance institutions due to colonial legacies and larger distortion in values and outlook. While tactical challenges need to be dealt with tactically, but a long-term strategic approach is critical for building a sustainable national security capacity.

India as the oldest civilization and the biggest democracy in the world needs to redefine its identity and priorities both in the interest of its people as well as larger stability of the world. It must not merely respond to threats and challenges but should attempt redefine the regional global equilibrium. Its inherent values and ethos are such that any progress towards optimizing the quality of its own security is likely to enhance the quality of global security. However, it has to pursue creation of conducive internal and external environment for its own growth as a society and state.

India and Pakistan are not comparable. In terms of Civilization, Pakistan – with its essentially Mamluk and decadent Mughal psyche- remains a destitute, lacking any past or vision for future. It has been least concerned for its own masses. The ruling syndicate has been using Islam to deploy various shades of criminality, violence and coercion to silence political opponents at home and deceitfully subvert institutions of open and transparent societies through various criminalized actions that have been part of its strategic policy to build a global clout for itself. Its congenital hatred for India has provided the raison-d’etre for both its own identity as a state as well as building such elaborate capacity for covert war.

     On the Other hand, despite the camouflage of communism, China has regained its earlier political trajectory of authoritarian imperial rule with the backing of an efficient civil service and professional army. Masses have remained oppressed and voiceless and yet contributing to the larger prosperity of its elite. The critical difference is that large sections of people have moved out of poverty. Better access to nutrition, healthcare and education has transformed most of them into stronger productive force for accelerated economic development. Nevertheless, higher echelons of political and economic power structure remain inaccessible to overwhelming majority of masses.

    With an efficient governance mechanism, driven by sense of civilizational superiority, China has continued to expand both its territory and domain of influence. It is likely to generate considerable human cost both at home and abroad until such time its systems crumble and collapse due to their inbuilt contradictions of opaque authoritarianism. This would be largely due to absence of safeguards or inbuilt checks and balances in their institutions. However, such a scenario can have devastating consequences whenever it happens. 

A NEWER NATIONAL VISION BACKED BY COMMENSURATE CAPACITY

India has been a much older civilization than China and a rootless Pakistan that represents a somewhat vagabond Mamluk-Mughal psyche of pleasure, plunder and loot through deceit and deception. India's nobler and loftier original values were sought to be revived during freedom struggle as well as in the aftermath of independence. But the country's strategic psyche and outlook suffers from negative impact of centuries of internal decay and degeneration. It has perennially suffered from insufficient internal cohesion and lack of stronger external strategic vision. This is what explains its disintegration, decay, degeneration followed by prolonged external occupation during medieval era, despite exceptionally glorious past. Some of the pitfalls of deficient strategic psyche continues to haunt it even now. Hence, it has ignored the external threats and overlooked internal contradictions for far too long. Its inability to optimally mobilise itself to address governance and security and priorities has been amply manifest even during Covid crisis even though most would believe that majority of governance institutions have been energized by personal appeal of Prime Minister Modi. 

Nevertheless, India has to cover a long distance towards building a reliable and sustainable national security cover that can manage external threats and optimizes internal internal strengths. In practical terms, it must translate into adequate institutional capacity to: a) conclude and eliminate the threat of covert war from Pakistan as well as space for radicalism within the country,  It must be achieved at minimum human and material costs and within a reasonable time frame;  b) Contain, or at least deter, the threat from China in every dimension; and c) optimize economic, social, military, technological and diplomatic capacities by harnessing all tangible and intangible strengths. 

This would require an extra-ordinary innovation to create a contemporary national vision and national outlook, that is consistent with Indian realities and Indian psyche.  It must be backed by adequate governance-security capacity that is sustainable in our context and yet contributes to our comprehensive empowerment as a state and nation. A stronger and sustainable national security capacity has always been one that integrates economic, military, political and social institutions and strategies in manner where each empowers the other. Hence, there is need to revamp institutions and outlook across the board. 

THE BRASS TACKS

India's defence forces - with the highest possible traditions of courage, valour and professionalism- have deftly handled tactical threats and challenges, even middle and higher rungs of serving military officers are known for deeper strategic understanding of geo-strategy and military security issues. However, it is well known that strategies of military warfare too are changing and military capacity on its own is not sustainable. Military institutions need a supportive and conducive ambiance to thrive, flourish and evolve. Simultaneously, tactical capacity of other civilian security apparatuses require suitable uplift, where it can supplement military capacity of the Indian state. What political leadership and other stakeholders of India can do is build a stronger strategic and institutional capacity and ensure optimum synergy between strategic goals and tactical priorities. 

Higher quality of human resources, in terms of stronger physical-cognitive-technical capacities, as well as the larger values like integrity-industry and enterprise, have traditionally constituted the base of the pyramid of national security. Instead of sheer numbers, it is these attributes that reflect the real strength of a population. It is these that determine productivity of soldiers, industrial, workers or agriculture workers or entire work force of a nation. 

India’s records are quite alarming in this direction. Relatively low life expectancy, high incidences of malnutrition and morbid diseases, impaired cognitive skills and stunted growth of large percentage of children, among others, have led to physically weaker and deficiently skilled work force. With poor access to high quality technical- professional capacities and even life skills, the overall productivity of collective human resource of India is way below the potential. It dilutes the advantages of sheer numbers. Such challenges appear unlikely to be resolved by the existing free-flowing, and somewhat chaotic, dynamics of markets or state of existing governance and healthcare institutions.

Simultaneously, disproportionately larger sections of our healthy and productive working population appear to have been sucked into professions like political activism, cinema, infotainment, marketing, advertising, liaison, public relations etc. These, together with various shades of disguised unemployment, or not so productive white-collared jobs, are such whose real contribution to the tangible national output may be suspect. These could be symptoms of a deeper underlying challenges like extreme inequality, deficient regulation, and structural imbalances of inadequately regulated market economy.  It will stretch the genius and imagination of even the best among Indian economists to find innovative solutions. We have to explore solutions beyond the prevailing dynamics of market economy or state control to gainfully harness advantages of large population.

Simultaneously, the nature of reforms that we need in regulatory and enabling capacity of the state may not have any ready-made parallels. We require much stronger and sharper capacity to segregate the bona-fide corporate entrepreneurship from subversive theft of resources in the name of private entrepreneurship. The former needs to be nurtured, protected, encouraged and supported in the larger quest of economic and technological advancement but the latter certainly needs to be deterred.  

Indian state requires more innovative approach and strategies to build its private sector as a genuine partner in wealth creation and generation of gainful employment. Given the quality of upper layers of human resources, India’s private sector can be a much bigger driver of economic and industrial prowess as well as technological innovation and excellence. Substantive progress in this direction would be difficult in absence of larger trust-based social systems, which encourage and sustain a wider culture of excellence and integrity driven leadership. It will test capacities of major stakeholders of the country to unleash such an agenda of transformation of institutions of state and society both.

Internal cohesion has always remained the most critical ingredient of national security. These have enabled states to handle external threats better. Despite sustained assaults on social harmony, and downsides like caste-based divisions, India’s cohesive heterogeneity has remained fairly robust and resilient. However, situation could be far better with a genuinely efficient criminal justice system. Stronger curb on malicious abuse of freedom of speech and expression or even deterrent action against malicious crime on part of incumbents in state and society would be critical for securing our governance capacity.

Simultaneously, India needs innovative and low-cost strategies to curb internal fissures. These erode capacity of the state to deal with external subversion and even military aggression. Despite consistent clandestine efforts of Pakistani deep state sponsored networks, overwhelming majority of Indian Muslims have remained immune to subversive propaganda and derive pride in their Indian identity. However, all identity-driven fissures, including radicalism in the name of Islam, can be addressed only through combined efforts of criminal justice system and societal initiatives like persuasion, communication and social reform strategies.

While, subversive radicalism peddled by hostile forces through clandestine global networks needs to be dealt with exemplary and deterrent coercion but political exploitation of identity divides could have serious negative impact on internal cohesion. However, coercive actions of state can have deterrent impact only if these are channeled through a process of credible and impartial criminal justice system. 

There are large number of studies suggesting that organised subversion- including radicalization and religious terrorism - and organised crime thrive and feed on each other. These eventually build a spiral of their own, making it difficult to differentiate normal corruption and sponsored subversion. India has to find a more effective solution to deny space to organised subversive and crime networks which have been flourishing, with the clandestine support of hostile forces.

With strong pockets of global influence, these clandestine networks, aided by access to advanced technologies and ability to operate swiftly and flexibly, can wield far more influence than what one can visualize. These can potentially subvert key institutions of state, interfere with our democratic governance processes and institutions to the detriment of our comprehensive national security. In certain situations, these can virtually paralyze capacity to key institutions to defend and protect even legitimate national interests of a democratic country.

 Gravity of the threat of subversion to open and democratic states and societies is manifest in the US allegations of external interference in its electoral process as well as key decisions of some other institutions. Sections of US media have highlighted this issue along with malicious abuse of the mechanism of lobbying by exploiting open nature of their society. Australia too has alleged consistent clandestine Chinese interference to exact its natural resources at a preferable prices. It is difficult to fathom the entire reality in this direction but available inputs expose greater vulnerability of even the most powerful democracy of the world to subversive assaults of clandestine nature.

United States, even with the most comprehensive network of efficient and autonomous institutions - enjoying access to most sophisticated technologies- has struggled to contain clandestine threats from China. Given the larger fragility of India’s governance or regulatory institutions, and intensity of hostility of some of its adversaries, its task is well cut out. Tactical efficiency like improvement in transparency in financial transactions, including electoral funding, or curb on bureaucratic corruption or curb on money laundering may be necessary but probably insufficient to address the scale of threat. 

India's unique geopolitics, where it is surrounded by a number of small states, requires a more innovative approach. China has been seeking to build bases of influence in each of these states. It is possible that it may scuttle and subvert democracy in most of these states to install or retain a pliable regime in each of these neighboring states to the detriment of aspirations and interests of local population. India has to bolster its own democratic, governance and diplomatic capacities  to retain buffer status of each of these states. 

Simultaneously, the gap between military capacity of India and China has increased manifold. India will struggle to contain China on its own. It has probably a stronger requirement today, than at any other point of time in the history, to closely align with US and NATO forces, without compromising its own independence and aspirations to grow. Such understanding is in the best possible interest of even the US led West. What is worrying today is declining American interest, under President Trump, in NATO at one level and impact it may have on India's traditional ties with Russia and Iran. India has to take the West into confidence and maintain its ties with both Russia and Iran at one end and forge an understanding with the US led West not merely to pursue national interest of the two biggest democracies of the world but the larger peace and stability that the world has enjoyed under the US led international order. 

 

CONCLUSION

Hence, a paradigm shift in the national security outlook of the world's biggest democracy has become indispensable given the scale of challenges and threats. A comprehensive restructuring of institutions and outlook, howsoever Utopian it may sound,  has become indispensable as the cost of status-quo would be simply unaffordable. 

However, India, at this juncture of history, faces a predicament that probably very few big powers or civilizations may have faced in their entire journey. Its potentials and opportunities to rise as a major global power are entwined with formidable challenges in this direction. There is massive domestic aspiration- by significant potential- well as wider international support in favour of accelerated advancement of India. India’s rise is also seen as the biggest possible antidote to both Islamic radicalism as well as opaque authoritarianism. But impediments - both internal as well as external – could be far too formidable in this direction.

Besides clandestine influence of global cliques, cartels or networks - as well as rough and tumbles of globalised world- India may face resistance from large sections of its own political, corporate and bureaucratic elite. Many of them have thrived and flourished in an ecosystem of fragile institutions. They may be apprehensive of competition, transparency and meritocracy that could potentially result in loss of privileges and entitlements. A persuasive, gradual but time bound transition appears unavoidable in larger interest of national security.

China’s spectacular governance accomplishments, compared to post-colonial democracies, have raised serious doubts about the efficacy of the existing Western democratic governance institutions to transform the plight of people in the developing world. Saturating governance capacities of the Western democracies or the roots of their prosperity confirms such apprehensions. Chinese scholars often claim that West was able to establish its comprehensive material, intellectual and technological superiority over the rest largely due to colonial moorings of its early prosperity. These provided foundation for subsequent innovations, industry and enterprise. China claims to have built its prosperity and technological modernisation through sheer strength of its civilisational values and governance model, which it claims to be superior than contemporary democracy.

India’s societal ethos have retained their essentially humanist, plural and transparent nature. This is despite all pressures and distortions or degeneration, which have been backed by significant phases of resurrection. This is what explains sustenance of democracy in India even under adverse circumstances. Any drift towards authoritarianism is likely to be counter-productive given essential ethos and values of its people. This is likely to erode the capacity and output of India as a nation. Hence, the biggest democracy of the world has to explore refinement of some of its key institutions to bolster its collective national output. Proposed reform must cover political parties to civil service, criminal justice system, corporate sector, media, civil society entities, institutions of higher research, heath-care and elementary education regime etc.

 India will have to practically spearhead transition of contemporary democracy to the next higher stage of evolution for building and sustaining a stronger national security architecture. It shall have to build high quality governance institution, equipped with suitable norms, values and procedures as well as wider culture of superior skills, output and leadership. Political, bureaucratic or even corporate rent, or entitlement driven privileges or hereditary leadership, is a luxury that no dynamic society can afford within any of its institutions. Hence, reforms in political parties and corporate organisations become very critical.

 Democracies can potentially create far superior governance institutions than their authoritarian counterparts. However, they need to marshal their basic principles to build a stronger synergy between individual and institutional excellence, where both drive and sustain each other. India has to explore an integrated and yet dynamic framework of high-quality governance and social institutions. Their autonomy and independence may be crucial for optimal growth, evolution and output. But they must be able to collaborate with each other in pursuit of larger objectives of governance. This would require suitable safeguards and instruments of functional complementarity along with a wider culture of integrity.  

 Probably, challenges towards such transition would be huge. But with a decisive nationalist government at the helm, there could not have been more opportune time for the country to embark upon a journey in this direction.