10 |

WEEKEND
IPSO FACTO

NOIDA/DELHI

THE HINDU

SATURDAY, JANUARY 9, 2016

saturday, january 9, 2016

Chinas contagious
economic turmoil

hinas transition to a new normal rate of

growth was always expected to be bumpy. But,
as it shifts gears, the Asian giant is spilling
pain on to the rest of the world, and volatility
is about the only certainty in the global economy at the
moment. The yuans depreciation on Thursday to its
lowest level since 2011, again put stock markets and currencies worldwide under pressure. Investors fear other
countries could now be forced to consider competitive
currency devaluations. The depreciation was less unexpected than the devaluations in August and is in line with
Beijings move to make the yuan all set to become a reserve currency of the International Monetary Fund
more market-linked. Theres a fresh worry: Chinas foreign exchange reserves shrank by $108 billion in December, the biggest monthly drop on record, and declined by
$513 billion last year. To put this figure in perspective, Indias foreign exchange reserves added up to $350.4 billion
on January 1. The accelerating outflows from China, investors fear, could also be a sign of the countrys deepening troubles. China is rebalancing its economy, shifting it
away from a model of debt-fuelled infrastructure and
low-cost exports towards lower but more sustainable
growth, driven instead by domestic consumption and
services. Reformers in Beijing want to slow the Chinese
economy, which expanded at a frenetic 10 per cent annually before 2008, and by about 7 per cent more recently. As the worlds second largest economy goes through a
recalibration, the question increasingly being asked is:
are the authorities in Beijing in control of the transition?
The scale and span of Chinas trade gives it an oversized influence over the global economy. Its waning appetite for commodities and imports is hurting economies
dependent on such exports. For India, though, the drop in
international commodity prices, especially of oil, is providing a silver lining as it is a net importer. The pain for
India will come from the big and growing trade deficit it
has with China. The deficit, which was $48 billion at the
end of March, had reached $36 billion in the first eight
months of this year and could worsen with the yuans depreciation. The Indian government must recognise that
the depreciating yuan is a threat above all to Prime Minister Narendra Modis Make In India plan. Indian manufacturers already suffer significant cost disadvantages.
Their competitiveness will now diminish further against
imports from China. Under the burden of Chinas slowdown, global trade itself has shrunk. Recovery continues
to elude the world more than seven years after the financial meltdown in 2008 and the subsequent monetary easing worldwide. India must recognise that the global economic scenario is far from healthy and take steps to spur
domestic growth.

The U.S.s
firearms menace

S. President Barack Obama parted with the

steely tradition of his two-term presidency
this week, when he shed tears at the White
House over what appears to have become a
top-of the-agenda item of his final year in office, gun control reform. Although he broke down at the mention of
six-year-olds massacred at Sandy Hook Elementary
School in Newtown, Connecticut, it was anger that
seared through his speech announcing executive actions
to take on the stubbornly lax regulation of guns in the
U.S. These actions aim to expand background checks for
gun ownership, boost funding for federal agencies enforcing gun laws, improve treatment of mental health
conditions nationwide, and herald an era of smart gun
technology to prevent accidental firearm deaths. Few
would blame Mr. Obama for feeling frustration over the
quagmire that has greeted every attempt of his to start a
conversation on what many worldwide would consider a
reasonable restriction on the constitutionally enshrined
right to bear arms. He has pitched for tighter, more meaningful gun laws no fewer than 15 times from the Oval Office, and his most ambitious attempt to bring the discussion to the floor of the Senate three years ago was
speedily disposed of by hostile lawmakers. This weeks
executive action had echoes of that 2013 omnibus gun
control bill, yet in the face of uncertain funding prospects
in a Republican-controlled Congress, likely resistance
from conservative states and near-certainty of legal challenges, it may lack the teeth to seriously impact gun
proliferation.
There are two forces behind Americas abysmal progress in halting the regular occurrence of gun rampages
in public spaces. The first is what Mr. Obama described
as the lies of the pro-gun lobby, whose lifeblood is the
influential National Rifle Association, funded largely by
gun manufacturers. After every mass killing with guns,
NRA spokespersons proclaim in the American media
that the only answer to gun deaths is more guns. Their efforts are bolstered by Republican presidential hopefuls
such as Donald Trump. The second, more intractable,
impediment facing any would-be reformer is the U.S.s
cultural proclivity for gun ownership. Even though a
Quinnipiac poll last month found 89 per cent overall support for expanded background checks, a CNN poll the
same month found that only 48 per cent of Americans favoured stricter gun control laws. Like any other cultural
revolution, unwinding this national obsession with guns
will be a slow process. Ultimately the realisation must
dawn that, contrary to the Second Amendments promise
that the right to bear arms will protect the public from
the tyranny of government, in the 21st century it is the
tyranny of firearms that truly threatens the American
way of life.

CM
YK

GAPS IN THE GRID: Pathankot has shred to pieces the cycle of terror responses in India: from processing intelligence alerts, mobilising first responders, carrying out counterterror operations

under a well-defined command-and-control system, minimising casualties and, finally, obtaining maximum intelligence to thwart possible future attacks. Picture shows soldiers on watch
at the perimeter fence of the Pathankot airbase. PHOTO: AP

Save security from the establishment

The bungled response to the Pathankot attack underscores the need for a three-pronged revamp: parliamentary
oversight, a well-defined national security doctrine and an independent federal commission of accountability

ost terror attacks in India are characterised by three critical missteps: ignored intelligence inputs, inconsistent security response, and heavy
casualties.
Consider, for instance, the Pathankot
and the 26/11 Mumbai terrorist attacks. A
few days before the boat with terrorists
actually landed in Mumbai, the Intelligence Bureau had details of the specific
location of a satellite phone used by terrorists on a boat moving towards the
Mumbai coast. In the run-up to the attacks, there were at least two more specific alerts Indian agencies had about a possible attack on Mumbai.
After 166 people were killed, hundreds
injured, and India held to ransom for days
and humiliated on the global stage by 10
terrorists, no one was held accountable.
Those who were supposed to act on the
terror alerts, those who were supposed to
guard the seas and those who were supposed to protect Mumbai, all carried on
with their professional lives.
In Pathankot the story just got worse.
The U.S. agencies had alerted their Indian
counterparts around Christmas about a
group of half-a-dozen terrorists planning
to target the city. By early morning of January 1, a senior police officer
reported his ordeal with the terrorists. Despite several hours
available to intercept the terrorists in a limited space, New Delhi, in its wisdom, decided to
waste time by flying in National
Security Guard (NSG) comJosy Joseph
mandos from the national capital, while thousands of trained
army soldiers were already stationed all over Pathankot.
As with 26/11, the criminal neglect by
those responsible for acting on the information would again be whitewashed. The
Central government would again come to
the conclusion that no one was responsible for the lapses that resulted in the humiliating attack and the mismanaged counterterror operation.
In all of its contemporary history, India
has only been going around in a loop in its
inability to tackle armed non-state actors.
Jaish-e-Mohammad, the Pakistan-based
terror group suspected to be behind the
Pathankot attack, was founded by Masood Azhar, who was one of the three terrorists freed by India in yet another embarrassing episode of terrorism on
another year-end: on December 31, 1999,
the National Democratic Alliance (NDA)
government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee decided to release three terrorists after Indian Airlines flight IC814 was hijacked to
Kandahar, to secure the lives of the
passengers.
Reshaping Indias security posture
Though Indias wars with neighbouring countries have played the most important role in impacting its security posture, terrorism has, in fact, been the
biggest threat faced by the country on almost all major counts the number of
soldiers killed, duration of engagement
with armed movements or the spread of
the menace. However, terrorism hasnt
had a commensurate impact on reshaping
Indias security posture and tactics, as
well as political strategies.
That might explain why India has one
of the poorest track records in tackling insurgencies. Various studies have shown
that insurgencies with external support
tend to linger on longer than purely domestic movements. Broad assessments of

Thelack of accountability has

meant that field operations of
intelligence agencies are
mostly cottage industries run
on fake sources or
exaggerated claims
considering the limited diplomatic options available to rein in those countries.
Besides, practical statecraft will acknowledge that the use of non-state actors for
tactical and strategic aims across the border is commonplace. Every battlefield,
from Bangladesh in 1971, where the Mukti
Bahini militia was armed and trained by
India, to the present battlefield of Syria,
where the U.S. and other international
powers are arming militias, has similar
stories.

armed conflicts since World War II show

that their average time span is just over
four years. A RAND Corporation assessment of 89 armed movements said that
they last for approximately 10 years on average; the governments chances of winning a civil war keep improving as the
armed movement becomes protracted. In
India, none of those statistics seem to
work. The Naga insurgency is as old as independent India, several other northern
movements are several decades old, and
Kashmir militancy started in the late
1980s. One can attribute their longevity to
the role of neighbouring countries such as
Pakistan and China in fomenting these
movements, but it is a futile blame game

Pathankot has shown that

terror responses cannot
be left to the whims and
fancies of a few, however
lionised they are

Even-handed approach needed

However, there is a second aspect of
terrorism/insurgency that can be better
calibrated. At the core of the state response should be a well-delineated national security doctrine and security
strategy. And the doctrine has to be
placed firmly on constitutional values, especially equality before law. Addressing
grievances of various groups and dealing
with all wrongdoers with the same force
of law is critical in this fight against terrorism. Successive governments have
failed that test. When political expediency prevails over constitutional duties, the
state cannot expect to defeat terrorism.
In the encounter killing of Sohrabuddin
Sheikh, or the terror cases of Malegaon,
Samjhauta Express, Mecca Masjid, etc.,
the states prosecution has been differential and has varied depending on the government in power. The Central Bureau of
Investigation and the National Investigation Agency are actively used as tools of
the government of the day. Indeed, the
Narendra Modi government is not writing out any fresh instructive manuals for
Indian democracy, but only carrying on
with the expedient practices mastered by
successive Congress regimes and other
coalition governments. This must end, if
the Indian state is serious about fighting
terrorism.
Political misuse of state organs and the
complete lack of transparency in their operations have resulted in Indian intelligence agencies emerging as obscure centres obfuscating facts or exaggerating
things, mostly to impress political masters or for other vested interests. The lack
of accountability has also meant that field
operations of intelligence agencies are
mostly cottage industries run on fake
sources or exaggerated claims. Underlying all of it is the significant financial benefits. The final result is that even when
genuine intelligence alerts are available,
they are not acted upon with seriousness.
Most intelligence alerts of Indian agencies actually read like fantasy stories from
unbridled minds. Most often, they are
merely that.
Pathankot has shred to pieces the cycle
of terror responses in India: from processing intelligence alerts, mobilising first
responders, carrying out counterterror
operations under a well-defined command-and-control system, minimising
casualties and, finally, obtaining maximum intelligence to thwart possible future attacks. The raid on the airbase has

shown that terror responses cannot be

left to the whims and fancies of a few individuals, however lionised they are. It has
yet again highlighted the fact that India
still does not have a laid-down policy response to its biggest security threat.
A documented security doctrine
It is time to finally accept the reality
and move forward on a broad sweep of reforms in the security establishment. This
could be done at three levels parliamentary oversight, a well-defined national security doctrine and a national security strategy to implement the doctrine,
and, finally, an independent federal commission of accountability on security
matters.
There have been several discussions
about improving the accountability of intelligence agencies and other federal organisations responsible for the security of
the country. Many experts are apprehensive of an adverse effect of parliamentarians being given oversight of intelligence
agencies. However, the fact is that there is
no better accountability system possible.
The diversity of Indian politics will ensure there is robust oversight, and that the
mechanism is not held hostage by a few
vested interests in Parliament.
As many experts recommend, it is time
for India to have a documented national
security doctrine, like the Constitution,
so that successive governments do not
forget the fact that they are mere custodians of an idea called India, and not revolutionaries mandated with recreating the
nation-state. The tweaking of Indias security concerns, based on their limited
understandings and jingoistic or pacifist
persuasions, has had a terribly adverse
impact. When I.K. Gujral became the
prime minister, he shut down Indias covert capabilities abroad in the simplistic
assumption that it would bring peace; by
rushing in the NSG to Pathankot and ignoring the huge Army capabilities available in the vicinity, the Modi government
miserably mismanaged the operations in
the airbase.
Standard response protocols
The doctrine should be accompanied
by a security strategy that should spell out
the state response to various kinds of security challenges. If it is a terrorist strike,
then the decision-makers must know the
responses expected of them, and not try
to improvise based on their limited
awareness. Command and control for
such operations should also be spelt out
in the document.
Finally, and most importantly, India
must constitute a very credible, and permanent, federal commission of accountability on security matters. This is important not just to bring in accountability to
the security establishment, but also to ensure that the many insurgencies and terrorist challenges do not result in the intelligence and security apparatus getting a
free hand to misuse their powers. Such a
commission can also be a watchdog in
places like Kashmir and the Northeast,
where repeated allegations of human
rights violations are haunting political efforts to find peace, and feeding terrorism.
India, and its security forces, cant any
more trust the wisdom of a few wise men
to tackle terror threats, secure our assets
and safeguard national interests. The first
step is to write down what the rulers of
the day should do when a terror threat
occurs.
josy.joseph@thehindu.co.in
ND-ND