If AFSPA goes, the Army goes too

Brigadier P.T. Monappa Brigadier Monappa is a former Military Intelligence Corps officer. One of his achievements was capturing the person responsible for preparing the crude improvised explosive device crafted for the purpose of assassinating former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, earning him the Vishista Seva Medal

In order to discuss the removal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), one needs to first understand why it has been implemented in the first place. It is present in certain areas in the country under the provisions of the Disturbed Area Act of 1976. When an area is disturbed because of lawlessness, insurgency or any law and order problem which can’t be controlled by the police, and there is an armed uprising against the state, the area is declared as ‘disturbed’ after due deliberation.

The Indian Armed Forces are sent in only when the local authorities can’t control the situation. One would have to agree that the Army is trained and geared to fight a battle against external aggression and to defend our borders. The Army is called in when the other apparatus of the state and central government have failed to control the situation. And once the Army is called in, they don’t have any inherent protection under the law. Thus comes AFSPA.

The Army is conferred with some special powers that empower army officers, junior commissioned officers and warrant officers up to a particular point to deal with the insurgents, and in case of use of force. Without such powers, the deployment of the Army is futile.

Let’s take the current case: In Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram, Assam, Tripura, Meghalaya, commonly known as seven sisters, AFSPA is in place and the Army has been operating there. The Act was repealed in district after district only after the situation was brought under control. Now the question is the uptick in insurgency in Nagaland and Manipur. It needs to be understood that once the Armed Forces are called in to deal with a disturbed situation, they don’t have the immunity that police have. The Army has special powers and those powers (for example Disturbed Area Act) cannot be contested in the court of law. Neither can the army officers’ actions.

The Army would be happy and relieved to not be part of the mechanism to deal with insurgencies, and instead train regularly and to be prepared to defend their borders and fight against external adversaries. The army is called when the other forces fail and once it’s called in, it has to be given wide-spectrum powers and legal protection, failing which cases would be filed in courts. There is no non-violent way to fight insurgencies.

Uproar and agitation

This is not the first time that Army forces have blundered and killed civilians, and it won’t be the last. If AFSPA is revoked, the Army will have to be withdrawn from the disturbed areas. The problem, especially in Nagaland and Manipur, is the presence of insurgent groups, mainly the two factions of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland – one led by S S Khaplang and the other by Isaak Chishi Swu and Thuingaleng Muivah.

Besides these two groups, there are around 200 factional groups that fight each other for influence. It is not that they’re fighting against the Army or the Union of India: They are fighting amongst themselves even as of today. They have sanctuaries in Myanmar and it has been China’s grand plan since 1970 onwards to use them against India. The PLA has been training them. To deal with this issue, the Army has been deployed. Local politicians have been shielding these insurgent groups.

The Army has also been facing a lot of issues. This seems to be a good situation for people to demand the removal of AFSPA. There is no doubt that there have been certain violations and miscalculations by the Army, for which it has already apologised.

But the question is: Have Indian Army personnel also not been killed? The insurgents have also laid ambushes against the Army, the recent example being the killing of a commanding officer who was killed along with his wife and child. Army posts have been raided and a number of personnel have been killed. What about such killings? The human rights violations against the Army personnel also need to be looked into.

Anyone commenting on the recent events has no knowledge of what an ambush is, how it is laid and how it is operationalised. None other than Army personnel have knowledge about it. The recent incident is being criticised as a failure of intelligence. Intelligence is gathered from various sources, the challenge is in interpreting the input and using it in operations. We have a grading system in the intelligence department, sorted by quality of input: A1, B2, C3 and D4. What sort of source was it? Was it a reliable source (A1)? Was it credible?

Wh