Whether it be a seasoned journalist who has reported live from battlegrounds, or a civilian, no one should feel entitled to shoot their mouths off when it comes to "understanding" the Indian army. Exposure to the working of our armed forces in the past doesn't make anyone eligible to be arm-chair critics of on-going operations. Lack of exposure, on the other hand, cannot be compensated by eulogies and chest-thumping. Most of us are just civilians who turn our heads away if blood has spilled in a road accident. If we insinuate an understanding of the kind of situations the jawan faces on the Line of Control, we are fooling ourselves and over-estimating the outreach of our empathy.
We cannot possibly empathise with the armed forces and its soldiers because the institution is too huge to be understood from a distance.
A section of news media, mostly television, has gotten a new lease for their chest-thumping antics after the Uri attack. The elimination of three terrorists in Handwara early Thursday morning will give them more fodder. Another section of media, that till now was used to indulge in humanist discussions, has quietened down. Both groups, comprised of those that chest-thump, and those who indulge in human rights debates, are equally dangerous because both fail to see the grey between the black and the white. The enticing emotional bravado makes war seem like cakewalk; from the safety of newsrooms anchors demand drastic actions that take the bravery and sacrifice of our soldiers for granted. They enforce subtle threats and intimidation that reluctance to join the chest-thumping frenzy is a legit reason to earn choice anti-national labels.
The latest trend set by the media is denouncing Pakistani actors. Well, I spent better part of my evenings watching Pakistani serials and got starry eyed seeing Fawad Khan on a legally aired entertainment channel. Following Uri, the channel has gone in a hiatus. It goes without saying that the jawan whose name or face I don't know is far more important than Fawad Khan. One can live without serials or film releases, one cannot live with drooping morales of our army men. But, do we seriously need to invest precious prime time in shouting matches to discuss this?
Those calling for war, another surgical strike, or "to finish them" should understand that wars are (ideally) not declared on popular demand. A constant urge for revenge, redemption and bloodbath -- or pacifism and strategic restraint -- may not be in line with the country's ground realities and our strategic priorities. Leave the decisions to our policy makers, to our government in power, and to our armed forces. Once those decisions are made -- whatever they are -- show trust, restraint and solidarity. It is infuriating that some politicians are demanding proof of the surgical strikes across LoC and some sections of media are entertaining spirited debates on the same.
Kashmir remains at the heart of the India-Pakistan animosity. The local unrest following the killing of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani reveals an undeniable and deep-set internal conflict within the Indian territory. Club the Kashmir conflict with the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) and you enter a vicious debate of national security, ethics, human rights that cannot be wished away with a magic wand.
But, it is highly important to distinguish army action from policy decisions.
The army is trained to kill. Deploying them in civilian areas puts them in highly unsavoury situations that are at loggerheads with their core training. The predicament of the armed forces stationed in civilian areas, especially where AFSPA is declared, is far less understood and empathised. Till policy decisions are made by governments and political will conclusively changes the scheme of things on ground, the army will bear the brunt and be expected to slug it out in highly unsupportive local environs.
While the atmosphere continues to seethe and tensions rise across the LoC, Sushma Swaraj tweeted about her concerns for the well-being of a Pakistani delegation to India by saying, "Betiyan sabki saanjhi hoti hai," (roughly translated, means 'Daughters must be cared for by everyone'). Even as the government made public the surgical strikes across LoC - the first such public announcement in Indian history which was a huge morale boost for the army - it kept its diplomatic options open. Diplomacy is a nuanced, complicated exercise best left beyond the glare of live television. So are army operations. News channels are doing a disservice to our diplomatic missions and to the army by indulging in adrenaline-laced shouting matches.
The jawan on the border, if he gets the time, will rather read a letter from his family or make a quick call home. He doesn't have the time or facilities to see TV, let alone indulge in intellectual constipation like that carried out television channels. The jawan doesn't tweet and the jawan doesn't troll. Fundamentally, those who serve in the army are trained to follow orders without question, to jump in the line of fire without a second's hesitation, to die - and to kill - without regret. This is exactly the kind of rugged, disciplined and ruthless characteristic of our army - any army - that keeps countries secure. Such is the spirit and the sacrifice of our armed forces that it constantly challenges us to stretch the extent of our empathy. It is impossible to empathise enough with these heroes.
