No State can wither away voluntarily. That is of course if a nation is to remain a cohesive, political entity. This is the hard lesson idealists, especially diehard followers of the intellectual colossus of the 20th Century, Karl Marx, have to learn. The State also predicates the military. As it stands today, the success of a republic is preconditioned by the military prowess it is able to acquire. People`™s rule does not mean marginalization of the State instrument. The past is the proof, but the present is no exception. And so it is symbolic that India, as any other country, celebrates its military on every anniversary of the day the day it became a republic 65 years ago by showcasing its latest military hardware in New Delhi. Civil processions of cultural and industrial contingents only follow the show of military strength, but these civil processions hardly can be said to be primary, although theoretically in a republic, the ordinary citizens are supposed to be ultimate sovereigns. In the state capitals, scaled downed versions of the same militaristic rituals are played out on the same day. The police and paramilitary forces in smart uniforms march to assure that behind the government is the power that flows out of the barrels of the guns. In war or peace, it is always the military that forms the overriding backdrop.
This is not a question of the State machinery doing a Kafkaesque turn and becoming an independent alien entity, accumulating power and defending the process of this continual power acquisition. There is a general will amongst the people that the State should evolve the way it has always been, with its military leading the way. The gun precedes the butter, regardless of what economists say. The response to a poll a little over a decade ago by a national magazine is interesting in this regard. On the question of what they considered as the pivotal event that launched India on the path of progress, an overwhelming number of respondents gave as their first choice the 1998 detonation of five nuclear weapons at Pokhran.
This logic is everywhere: In India as elsewhere. The military always predicates development. Take the instance of the North East Council, NEC. One of its chief requirements is for the Governors of the state to present a report of the law and order situation in their states and with this as one of the major guidelines, developmental plans are to be chalked out. It is also interesting to note that one of President George W Bush`™s defences for his invasion of Iraq now is that his country`™s aggression is all about making Iraq a true republic whose benefits can reach its people in an equitable way. It is another matter that the invasion has reduced Iraq today to a state of total anarchy. The earlier reasons professed for the war, as we all know, was the alleged weapons of mass destruction, WMD, in the deposed dictator, Saddam Hussein`™s arsenal. Although we object to the self righteousness and the assumption of egoistical sublimity in this attitude of the West `“ that WMDs are safe in their hands, but not in any other`™s `“ perhaps there is no other way of looking at peace than to think in terms of a balance of military power, rather than disarmament and demilitarization. This is not a question of pessimism but acknowledgement of a harsh reality.
The point then is, under the circumstance, the quest for peace must be reoriented for it to be meaningful. Even though many peaceniks will think this is perverse, deadly weapons in the possession of the State, it does seem continues to be a source of security and wellbeing for the people of the State. Ironic as it may sound, the republic must have weapons, the deadlier the better, to be able to convince its people it can guarantee them peace. There is also a reverse inference to this whole argument. Just as the military predicates the republic, challenges to the republic cannot but be of a militaristic nature. Insurgencies cannot be conducted through correspondences and appeals, but by violence alone. This is the tragedy, and the only way to get around the problem permanently would have ultimately to be to remove the reasons that spawned insurgency in the first place. Easier said than done.
Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam