[In a parallel universe called Humility]
"The security forces that felled Prabhakaran of the LTTE were
the same men and women in uniform who had struggled but failed in their mission
for a quarter of a century. Today, as I
reflect on the question ‘why not before?’ I realize that all the equipment,
training, numbers, intelligence and synergy among the forces would have come to
naught without the green-light, confidence and determination of the political
leadership. On that occasion, for once
let’s say, the political leadership did not waver, did not lie, and most
importantly shared the sentiments of the vast majority of the people. I knew that terrorism could only be defeated
militarily and was confident that our forced could get the job done. The political leadership shared this view,
obviously. Our troops delivered. I cheered.
"What I forgot in the rush of joy at war’s-end is that it was
produced by a key convergence: the sentiments and aspirations of the masses
being shared by the political leadership.
That kind of agreement on one matter does not imply agreement on all
matters across the board. "The political leadership can (and will, if history means anything) deploy troops to achieve ends that may not be to the liking of vast sections of the population. Troops follow orders. They are deployed, most often, when other state agencies have failed to resolve a particular problem. They are a last line of defense, sure, but what they are defending could be people’s interest (shared by the political leadership) or political interest (irrelevant to the general public). They can err, they can be excessive. What I forgot was that they follow orders and that the order is not always mandated by the people.
"I should not give blank cheques to anyone. Not the troops, not the political
leadership. I can cheer of course, but
not without relinquishing my right to criticize."
2 comments:
Is a 'patriotic citizen' expected to cheer the armed forces when they attack patently unarmed citizens who protest in a cause? Why are soldiers in battle gear sent to quell a protest,even if it turns angry, when the country has an adequate police force with riot squads?
What is most disturbing is the attitude of the authorities to justify the attack on the unarmed citizens by announcing that first the unarmed citizens have shot at the forces. Who on earth would take this seriously.
Post a Comment