Debate: Army still trusted and revered

Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) has arrested nine people so far in the Malegaon bomb blast case. After arresting a serving army officer, Lieutenant Colonel Srikant Prasad Purohit, and Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, the ATS is turning its attention to a religious leader in Lucknow.

The BJP, which has made terror its poll plank, is watching with concern.

But the bigger concern remains if the image of the army been irreparably damaged by terror allegations.

CNN-IBN debated the issue on Face the Nation with a panel comprising senior BJP leader B P Singhal, Secretary, Citizens for Justice and Peace, Teesta Setalvad; defence analyst Major General (Retd) Sheru Thapliyal and filmmaker Samar Khan who directed Shaurya, a film about a senior army officer faking kills.

The provocative debate was moderated by senior editor Sagarika Ghose.

The show started on a point everybody on the panel agreed with: Army is respected as a secular institution; it is expected to do its service in J-K, North-East and must be seen to be secular. Always. However, incidents like Purohit’s come as a shocking aberration. But is it really an aberration or a horrifying trend?

Thapliyal began the debate and said such incidents (of the involvement of army officers like Purohit in Malegaon blast) should be treated as exception, not rule.

PAGE_BREAK

“You shouldn’t think Army is going to dogs. Nothing of the sort is going to happen. But yes, the Army must see it in a different light. That is, the people of this country have great faith in them and they get perturbed when such things happen. So Army should feel happy that people are concerned and then take measures to make sure incidents like these don’t happen,” he said.

But is fratricide even comparable associated with terror? BJP leader B P Singhal interrupted the debate to demanded to know where all the information was coming from. “Why can’t the investigator announce this to the world that he has all this information? Why does the press have to buy it from them?” he thundered.

Muslim terrorist, Hindu terrorist: Same difference?

Singhal also defended his party’s stand – that a Hindu can never be a terrorist – and said same was true of Muslim terrorism simply because its roots weren’t in India. “Islamic terrorism is dangerous to the country due to ISI and Pakistan’s involvement,” he argued.

He also argued the branding of a terrorist – as Hindu or Muslim – was being done by the media and the ATS. “If he is proved to be so, yes he is a terrorist. But for God’s sake produce some evidence against him,” he said.

But Teesta Setalvad made a counter point. She argued anything that involved the use of explosives to propagate a religious ideology amounted to terrorism – and that included the RSS and the VHP in this case.

PAGE_BREAK

“For the first time, chargesheets have been filed against RSS and VHP. It’s a surreptitious ideology that believes in violence. It does not believe in a secular, democratic India. Just like SIMI does not,” she argued.

But every statement she made was furiously countered and interrupted by Singhal. He argued no criminal offence could be established unless you establish the motive which, in this case, hadn’t been established.

Teesta said the motive was to create communal tension and pretend as if Muslims were doing it. “The motive of the Hindu terrorist is to disguise himself as Muslim and plant bombs,” she argued and lashed out at Singhal, even saying he shouldn’t be a Member of Parliament.

Samar Khan’s film Shaurya dealt with the issue in some detail. It was the story of a senior Army officer who was supervising and carrying out fake kills to “cleanse the society of Muslims”. He said while the Army wasn’t tainted beyond repair just as yet, it was time for introspection. “If someone from the country’s most secular institution can be affected by ghettoisation, it’s a sign of troubled times,” he said.

Armymen: Vulnerable or immune?

But Army officers posted in insurgency-affected areas are exposed to religious extremism and therefore, are vulnerable to developing their own ideologies. “Yes, they are human beings and not robots. They have emotions. When they see things happening around them, it’s natural to react,” Khan said.

But coming back to the debate regarding the Army, Thapliyal said given the ethos of the Army and how it functions, it’s tough to say if anyone was getting involved in “terrorist” activities like these. “Army is indifferent to all and any kind of ideologies. It’s a freak incident,” he argued.

PAGE_BREAK

Thapliyal said if Purohit was indeed found guilty, Army would take exemplary action against him. “Take for example the Tehelka tapes case where the only people who got punished were Army officers. The others got away,” he said.

Singhal agreed and said when one is in service, he/she could not carry their baggage of convictions. “Why don’t you keep quiet and let investigators do their job?” he asked Sagarika, “All this day-to-day argument irritates me and everyone else,” he thundered.

Setalvad said media should no be concerned about Singhal’s irritation. “For a long time, we’ve been saying do not judge. Do not jump to the conclusion that it was a jehadi group or a Muslim man. But now when a Hindu is involved, Singhal gets into the act. The point is you cannot have double standards,” she said.

The debate soon spiraled into a violent clash of opinions between Setalvad and Singhal. While Singhal insisted terrorism will remain a political issue, Samar Khan concluded that media and investigating agencies should point out the realities.

SMS/Web poll on the QOTD: Has the army’s image been irreparably damaged?

Yes: 44 per cent

No: 56 per cent