The Indian Army warns agitating Hindus in Jammu – good job! Hindus are not the Chinese Army or Islamic Militants and they deserve to be warned.

Posted on August 8, 2008. Filed under: Army, India, Kashmir |

The Indian Army has warned the agitating Hindus in Jammu, that it will “use force if necessary in Jammu”. This is quite consistent with past behaviour of the army and quite expected also. The Congress led UPA has now an overwhelming array of Islamic sympathisers, people who fell head over heels in love with “SIMI”, and with the Deobandi’s officially falling in line with token “appeasers”, the electoral “boot-licking” to try and gain “Muslim” votes has started. So the government has tried its ultimate weapon – the threat of army action. This is something it never dares against Muslims, but typically against forces deriving from within social groups and regions dominated by non-Muslims from which it had the greatest competition for leadership of the nationalist movement during colonial days – the predominantly Hindu Bengali communist extremists in the 70’s of Bengal which had given rise to Bose the nemesis of Nehru (of course as is typical with non-Muslim communities, there were Bengalis who were eager to lick Nehru’s boots), the predominantly Sikh Akalis in Punjab and the Sikh separatist movement in the 80’s, who during the Partition had given Nehru quite a lot of trouble in his confused dealings with Pakistan.

The methods employed aginst the Sikhs and the Bengalis were perfected during the first campaigns of liquidation of the Telengana communists in the 50’s and 60’s. The inventive genius of the Indian security forces including the army, in new methods of torture that can surely shame Marquis de Sade, were freely used. However the viciousness of this army always seems most effective against idealistic and more emotional youthful uprisings, which can be chewed up with delight. This brave army retreated before the Chinese Red army, and surrendered thousands of square kilometres of Indian territory. It could not recover these lands from enemy hands, neither did it recover lands seized by Pakistani tribals and army in Kashmir in the late 40’s. It has held on tenuously to the Siachen glacier, but has never been able to face up to Islamic militants with the viciousness it managed againts the Sikhs or the Bengalis.

The Indian army will never dare to challenge the Muslim militancy with the attitude it has done against the Hindus of Jammu. Because the Muslim militants will be more than its match in viciousness and non-standard or unethical combat. The Indian army’s top echelon comes from traditional non-Muslim military career families and aristocrats in India. The traditional non-Muslim military aristocracy of India has throughout Indian history been quite quick in capitulating before foreign invaders or allying themselves with the invaders. This alliance was most common with the Islamic invaders and the British, sometimes sealed with giving up daughters in marriage to Muslim rulers, and helping to liquidate uprisings against the British ( some of the descendants of the Maratha “aristocracy” raised by Shivaji as a liberating force or the descendants of the Rajput clans fighting against Mughal repression eagerly collaborated with the British in suppressing opposition to the British). These military aristocrats are most effective against the underclass in their own communities, but quite servile before Islam or Europeans – in other words, most servile to forces which surpass them in unethical warfare, or military ideologies that have no pretensions to humanitarian or ethical considerations (note that they are only effective against groups that have ideological qualms against using “any and every” combat activity – such as the Sikhs or the Naxals in the early phase of their uprisings).

One of the greatest weaknesses of modern democracies, is that the elite from a social class (parties can change) in such democracies can continue in power with the help of the ultimate threat that it can employ against its own underclass – the army maintained by the extraction of resources from this very same underclass through taxation. The weakness of the underclass stems from the fact that they are deliberately kept from having independent weapons or military hardware, so that the security forces or the army can be effectively unleashed against them if necessary. The strength of the US democracy comes from two fundamental aspects – (1) its complete right to free speech (2) its citizen’s rights to bear arms. The US will continue to lead in democratic forms before other “democracies” because of these two features (it may very well elect Barack Obama, a second generation non-white immigrant from an African country, its President). Militarily, the army can concentrate its efforts for defence only and being effective overseas as it knows that it can be quite costly in trying to deal with a full fledged armed rebellion by its own citizens.

In India, the army command should not make this mistake. Time and again, when the military aristocracy has failed its underclass, and sided with foreigners against indigenous cultures, it has given rise to new political forces and new military forces that overthrow hated regimes (the royalty of princely states must remember the boot-out they were meted out after independence – horse polo had to be replaced with bicycle polo). This should not be a preferable way for India to adopt and most unfortunate in terms of its economic development.

What is highly unusual is for the Army to issue directly an independent statement about using force against its own civilian population in the presence of a democratically elected government. Such statements are acceptable only from the elected government and not from the Army which is not directly accountable to the people. It is this  grave departure from democratic practice that is significant to note. This has not happened before in independent India – all such threats typically came from the government about using the Army to quell internal problems. If the government has done this, then it only indicates the ultimate knee-jerk reaction of a frightened elite, and sets a dangerous precedence for the only remaining broad based and functioning democracy on the subcontinent.


Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

4 Responses to “The Indian Army warns agitating Hindus in Jammu – good job! Hindus are not the Chinese Army or Islamic Militants and they deserve to be warned.”

RSS Feed for Dikgaj’s Weblog Comments RSS Feed

dude don’t disrespect the indian army. they are a secular force. and do what is best for the nation. it is us hindus who need to behave like our hindu sanskars and not follow the suite of the kashmiri muslims and start riots. the hindus should have started communication with the Muslims rather then fighting the government of india.

Dear Yamirb (Yamir Bhatt?),

Thanks for your comment. I am glad, that unlike Muslims, Hindus continue to show the diversity that helped Muslims dominate the Indian subcontinent in the first place. Hindu “sanskar” is as wide and diverse as the number of Hindus – instead of Muslim period Vaishnavite Bhakti cults, one could take for example the Gita itself, where Arjuna is exhorted not to hesitate shedding the blood of his relatives for doing “justice” and defending “Dharma” as Hind “sanskar”. As for the Indian army, it is highly unusual for the Army to issue directly an independent statement about using force against its own civilian population. Such statements are acceptable only from the elected government and not from the Army which is not directly accountable to the people. It is this grave departure from democratic practice thats worth noticing.

The Indian Army is a secular force always acting in the interest of the country, It has been fighting the militants in Kashmir at great cost to itself and they are muslims . The charge against the Army by the author shows his he is blinded by communal mindset.

I have always maintained, that Islamic dominance on the Indian subcontinent would not have been possible without active collaboration from sections of Hindu elite, who either out of self preservation motives, or being secretly drawn towards the pleasures promised by Islam to men, bent over backwards to help Islamic forces. It is therefore not surprising that VKDas borrows the typical “secular” expression of any negative criticism of any force bolstering Islam as “communal” whereas activities by or in favour of Islam are never found to be “communal”. I have never written anything in these columns that shows that I accept unconditionally everything that passes for Hinduism. VKDas deliberately ignores this, as well as my main point that the army’s presumption of making such statements independently in the presence of a democratically elected government is absolutely unacceptable and uses the standard expression of courtiers of the “establishment” – any criticism of the “official” line is “communal”.
According to a January 9 note by the army to the Defence Ministry, it had only 29,093 Muslims in 2004 in a total of 11 lakh personnel, roughly 2.7 percent of the total force. Is VKDas suggesting that the army has sent all of its 2.7% of the total army strength, Muslim personnel, in the Kashmir area to use them as cannon fodder against Muslim militants – wouldnt that be highly “communal”??

Where's The Comment Form?

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: