B.RAMAN
There has been a change of guard in the Union Home
Ministry since July 31,2012. Shri Sushil Kumar Shinde, till now in charge of
Power, has been shifted as the Home Minister in place of Shri P.Chidambaram,
till now the Home Minister, who has been moved to the Finance Ministry to fill
the vacancy caused by the election of Shri Pranab Mukherjee as the President of
India.
2. While there is no doubt that Shri Chidambaram
will do well in the Finance Ministry where he had served before, the
suitability of Shri Shinde as the Home Minister has been questioned by many.
3. Shri Chidambaram took over as the Home Minister
immediately after the 26/11 terrorist strikes in Mumbai. He took charge of the
nation’s internal security at a time when the stewardship of the Ministry under
his predecessor, Shri Shivraj Patil, had come in for severe criticism because
of his perceived poor handling of terrorism and insurgency.
4. Under the internal security mismanagement of
Shri Patil, the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), the Pakistani terrorist organisation,
spread its network of sleeper cells across North and Western India and carried
out a catastrophic act of terrorism in Mumbai in November,2008, which shook the
confidence of the Indian public in the capability of our intelligence and
security agencies to deal with Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. The Indian
Mujahideen (IM) made its appearance and carried out a series of terrorist strikes in different cities of the
country. The threat posed by the Maoist insurgents increased in the tribal
areas of central India.
5.Many critics kept pointing out the poor
professional management of the MHA by Shri Patil which was contributing to a
weakening of our internal security machinery. Despite their criticism, Shri
Patil was allowed to continue as the Home Minister without being held
accountable for his poor performance .
6. The devastating terrorist strikes of 26/11 in
Mumbai made his continuance as the Home Minister untenable and he was replaced
by Shri Chidambaram, who had earlier held charge creditably as the Minister of
State for Internal Security during the
Prime Ministership of the late Shri Rajiv Gandhi.
7.Shri Chidambaram’s tenure of almost four years as
the Home Minister saw a noticeable improvement in the professional management
of our internal security apparatus. He rapidly identified the deficiencies that
had contributed to the 26/11 strikes and took action to remove them. He
decentralised the deployment of the National Security Guards, set up the
National Investigation Agency to investigate serious cases of terrorism with a
pan-Indian dimension and considerably strengthened co-ordination among the
intelligence and security agencies in collecting, analysing and assessing
intelligence and taking the required follow-up action.
8. Shri Chidambaram was a man of considerable
physical and intellectual vigour and he had his vigour transmitted across the
internal security machinery. The morale of the counter-terrorism component of
the internal security machinery improved remarkably. For the first time since
the days of the late Shri Rajesh Pilot as the Minister of State for Internal
Security and Shri L.K.Advani as the Home Minister, the team work in the
counter-terrorism apparatus improved and the heads of the intelligence and
security agencies had the confidence that if they took their professional and
institutional problems to the Home Minister they will be attended to
immediately. They looked forward to their daily co-ordination meetings with
their Minister-in-charge.
9. Like Shri Advani, Shri Chidambaram realised the
importance of close co-operation with the intelligence and security agencies of
other countries, particularly the USA and Israel, for improving our
counter-terrorism management. The increased co-operation was in the form of
greater sharing of intelligence and professional knowledge.
10.Shri Chidambaram had a better understanding of
the mindset and machinations of Pakistan’s intelligence community and its
Interior Ministry headed by Mr.Rehman Malik and kept up the pressure on
Mr.Malik to act against the Pakistan-based conspirators of the 26/11 terrorist
strikes, though his pressure did not produce satisfactory results.
11.Shri Chidambaram’s counter-terrorism record was
creditable despite his failure to set in motion the proposed National Counter-Terrorism
Centre (NCTC) due to the misgivings of some Chief Ministers. Apart from the
terrorist attack on an Israeli national outside the Israeli Embassy in New
Delhi in February last---- attributed to Iranian agencies and the Hizbollah---
there has been no strike by Pakistan sponsored or inspired elements since
September last year.
12.His contribution to the creation of
near-normalcy in Jammu & Kashmir and a relaxed relationship between the
Central and State Governments has to be recognised.
13. Shri Chidambaram’s contribution to improving
our counter-insurgency management, particularly against the Maoists in the
tribal belt of central India, was not that satisfactory. His automatic reflex
of supporting the security forces after incidents involving large collateral
casualties even before properly enquiring into allegations of excesses stood in
danger of driving more people into the
hands of the insurgents.
14. The Maoist insurgents are our people from the
poor and under-privileged tribal communities and dealing with them called for a
more imaginative, sensitive and empathetic approach. They can’t be treated like
we treat the jihadi terrorists from Pakistan. Such an approach was missing in
his counter-insurgency management. Rightly or wrongly, one had an impression
that whereas he led from the front in counter-terrorism, he let himself be led
by the security agencies in counter-insurgency. His counter-insurgency record
left much to be desired.
15.The Union Home Minister wears two hats. He is
responsible for political as well as professional management. Whereas Shri Chidambaram’s
professional management was very good despite reservations over the way he
handled counter-insurgency, his political management, which depends on his
equation with State leaders from different parties and civil society groups,
was patchy. One noticed this in the way he mishandled the fasts of Swami Ramdev
and Anna Hazare in New Delhi last year. His action in having Anna arrested and
detained on flimsy grounds in the Tihar jail
and his inability to get the support of some of the Chief Ministers for setting up the NCTC did
not speak well of his political understanding and reflexes.
16. Shri Chidambaram was a man of ideas. He gave
public expression to his ideas in his speeches and statements. Two of his
worthwhile ideas related to the setting-up of the NCTC on the pattern of its US
counterpart and the creation of a separate Ministry of Internal Security to
deal with internal security management. His exercise to create the NCTC came to
a screeching halt because of suspicions that he might be planning to use the
NCTC as a political weapon against the State Governments headed by opposition
parties. His idea of an independent Ministry of Internal Security, on the
pattern of the post-9/11 US Homeland Security Department, remained a non-starter
reportedly because of lack of enthusiasm for the idea in his own party and
among his Cabinet colleagues.
17. There is palpable anxiety as to whether Shri
Shinde will be able to adequately step into the shoes of Shri Chidambaram or
whether he will turn out to be another Shri Patil letting the good work done by
Shri Chidambaram start rusting. As Power Minister, his management was mediocre.
He did not give indication of the kind of mental and intellectual rigour that
Shri Chidambaram exhibited. This is the first time Shri Shinde is going to be
exposed to serious internal security problems. His understanding of the
complexity of the tasks is uncertain.
18. Shri Shinde has taken over as the Home Minister
in the midst of an exercise in the MHA for the vetting of the important
recommendations of the Naresh Chandra Task Force on National Security relating
to internal security and strengthening the capability of the Intelligence Bureau. Those
recommendations were made after detailed discussions, among others, with Shri
Chidambaram and his senior officers in the MHA. Will Shri Shinde be able to
push through the vetting and implementation process with the same understanding
and energy as Shri Chidambaram would have done?
19.One has an impression that dictates of political
accommodation rather than dictates of
professional management of internal security have influenced his appointment as
the Home Minister. There is a question mark over his ability to hold his own
during interactions with foreign counterparts and with his Pakistani
counterpart.
20. This is not the first time one has a Home
Minister not well-versed in the professional
skills of internal security management. One had one in Shri Bhuta Singh
who was the Home Minister under Rajiv Gandhi. Rajiv compensated for it by
appointing Shri Chidambaram as his
Minister of State for Internal Security with direct access to the PM.
21.One had another in S.B.Chavan who was the Home
Minister under Narasimha Rao. Rao
compensated for the deficiencies of Chavan by appointing Shri Rajesh Pilot as
the Minister of State for Internal Security with direct access to the PM.
22. Shri Advani and Shri Chidambaram were strong
and professionally competent Home Ministers and hence did not need a strong
No.2. Shri Patil was weak in his
understanding and professional skills which was not compensated by a strong and
energetic No.2. The nation paid dearly for that.
23. The Prime Minister, Dr.Manmohan Singh, should
emulate the examples of Rajiv and Rao and appoint a competent and energetic
Minister of State For Internal Security
under Shri Shinde and give him right of direct access to the PM. ( 1-8-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd),
Cabinet Secretariat, Govt of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director,
Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate, Chennai Centre For China
Studies. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com . Twitter: @SORBONNE75 )
