Tuesday, 7 November 2017

An Introduction to Internal Security of India

The term national security in broad terms, including military and non-military dimensions of security. It must also clearly state the objectives of the strategy. These might be: protecting and defending the territorial integrity and national sovereignty of the country; protecting the core values of the nation as enshrined in the Indian Constitution; and ensuring the socio-economic development of the country. India’s goal should be to play a positive and effective role in global and regional affairs.

Let me first make some very brief comments about the concept of ‘Security’. The traditional view of security focussed on the application of force at the state level and was therefore a fairly narrow view, hinging on military security. It is now widely acknowledged that there is more to security than purely military factors. Today’s definition of security acknowledges political, economic, environmental, social and human among other strands that impact the concept of security. In the most basic terms, the concern for security of the lowest common denominator of every society, namely the ‘human being’, has resulted in the development of the concept of ‘human security’, which focuses on the individual.
Therefore, the definition of security is defnitely broad – and is related to the ability of the state to perform the function of protecting the wellbeing of its people. This formulation hark back to the days of Ancient Civilizations. In a democracy, it is for the elected government to provide this priority and focus, as only after this, a coherent National Security Strategy can be articulated.
Four types, internal threats should be taken care of immediately, for internal troubles these are internal, external, externally-aided internal, and internally-aided external.
Destabilising a country through internal disturbances is more economical and less objectionable, particularly when direct warfare is not an option and international borders cannot be violated. External adversaries, particularly the weaker ones, find it easier to create and aid forces which cause internal unrest and instability. India’s history is full of such experiences. Since Independence, we have faced many such situations, initiated by China, Pakistan and others in the Northeast and even in the western sectors of the country since the mid-60s.

Presently, almost all the countries of  Asia and Africa  are experiencing internal security problems, due to insurgency movements, ethnic conflicts, religious fundamentalism, or just cussed political polarisation.
India has a unique centrality in the South Asian security zone. It has special ties with each of its neighbours: ties of ethnicity, religion, language, culture, common historical experience, and of shared access to vital natural resources. However, apart from the advantages that these special ties offer, they often make it easier for external forces to exploit any internal dissent. Within the country, these special ties also tend to encourage Indian secessionist groups in establishing safe sanctuaries across the borders in neighbouring states; trans-border illegal migration, gun-running and drug-trafficking. Situated as we are between the ‘Golden Crescent’ and the ‘Golden Triangle’, secessionist groups taking to violence find little difficultyin indulging in drug trade and obtaining small arms within the country.
The people of the country speak 16 major languages, in over 200 dialects. There are about one dozen ethnic groups, seven major religion communities with several sects and sub-sects, and 68 socio-cultural subregions. When a socio-political and socioeconomic equilibrium is maintained in such a scenario, there is unity in diversity. But if there is even the slightest imbalance, we have more diversity and less unity.
Some specific issues that we are faced with, which have an impact on our internal security are:
 Problems of national assimilation and integration,particularly of the border areas in the North and Northeast.
Porous borders with Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar,Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, which enable illegal trans-border movements and smuggling of weapons and drugs. It is presumed that erecting fences on the international borders can stop all illegal trans-border movements. That is not so. First, it is not possible to guard or police every metre of the land, sea and air borders. Second, the construction of a fence along land borders is expensive and requires a tremendous amount of manpower for effective surveillance. Border fencing can assist in checking infiltration to an extent, but it does not and cannot eliminate it.
Weak governance including an ineffective law and order machinery and large-scale corruption. An ever-increasing section of the population is getting disenchanted with social justice, or the lack thereof. There is a continuous decay of the political, administrative, and security institutions of the country. Efforts to stem the rot have failed so far. Declining political and public values have led to consistent and persistent political interference.

Nexus between crime, insurgency and politics.

No comments:

Post a Comment