Editorial 1 : Stay with heavy hand
Recent context:
- Recently, few media organisations have been questioned by and Enforcement Directorate. The accusation is that the media outlet received funds from organisation/s which are arm/s of the Chinese propaganda machinery.
- The premise is that a media organisation which took “tainted funds” will necessarily take positions inimical to the national interest on some sensitive and controversial issues.
- The media outlet has denied these charges and has asserted that whatever it has published can be examined to assess if it has pushed a pro-China line.
Upholding the Rule of Law:
- If any media outlet, think tank or non-governmental organisation is genuinely suspected of breaking a law, it must be investigated.
- If these investigations reveal a criminal act or illegal actions, it must be charged and prosecuted in a court of law.
- The principle that these entities need to follow the law is obviously as applicable to them as to any individual or group.
- At the same time, law enforcement agencies have to bear in mind three propositions that are rooted in our democratic process. These propositions are so intrinsic to our democracy that one does not have to be a lawyer, which this writer is not, to state them
The principles need to be followed while implementing the rule of law
Upholding the Judicial scrutiny:
- One, the more draconian the law invoked against these entities, or any individual or group for that matter, the more care has to be exercised by senior members of the police and the security services that the material on which action is being taken will stand up to judicial scrutiny.
- It is unconscionable that individuals are locked up for years only to be ultimately released by the superior courts. It is equally reprehensible that organisations or media outlets are asked to close shop but the courts later find no legal justification for such drastic action.
Minimizing the collateral damage:
- Two, every step has to be taken to limit collateral damage. If there is a charge of illegal funding and of using those funds for actions against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of the state, then the net cannot be spread so wide as to involve persons who cannot prima facie be involved or have a knowledge of these activities even if they have an association with an organisation.
- This is especially so with regard to media outlets. A pervasive atmosphere of fear is contrary to the values and tenets of the Republic.
- It is necessary for senior members of law enforcement agencies to uphold the foundational values of the Republic even while combating those who seek to harm the state.
Need to speed up the process of trial or bail
- Three, enforcement agencies and the judiciary must ensure that matters pertaining to those laws in which bail is not easily available are decided very early.
- It can be rightly argued that there are thousands of undertrials in the country who are languishing in jail and their matters deserve to be expedited too.
- Hence, there is no need to give special consideration to those who are charged under stringent bail-denying laws.
- There is merit in this argument but there is a distinction between laws where bail is denied in the normal case and where official apathy or poverty leads to people being kept unnecessarily in jail.
Conclusion:
- Certainly, media outlets, NGOs and think tanks should exercise every care that they do not wittingly or unwittingly take funds from sources that are ultimately controlled by agencies or institutions of foreign governments.
- The very acceptance of funds can infringe the law but ultimately, such issues are to be decided by the courts. And there is need to speed up the justice process itself as it takes so long that the process in many instances itself becomes the punishment.
Editorial 2 : New Delhi, new Tel Aviv
Recent Context:
- Recent, horrible Hamas attack on Israel over the weekend quickly acquired a domestic political dimension in India.
- And the recent government of India, condemned the terror attack and expressing solidarity with Israel.
- That, in turn, lent a new wrinkle to the political sparring between the two parties on the commitment to fight terror in the election season.
Changing dynamics of relation between India and Middle-East
- Geopolitics of the Middle East in the 20th century inevitably intersected with the international relations of South Asia and acquired a more intensive character after Partition.
- However, the nature of that interaction has been changing in the 21st century. As the Middle East evolved in recent decades changes in Indian policy on the Middle East have been more consequential during the recent government.
The broad changes that are emerged out India-Israel relation
Establishing the full diplomatic relation with Israel
- The first decision was to bring India’s relationship with Israel out of the closet and signal full political ownership.
- To be sure, it was Congress Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi who ended the policy of keeping a distance from Israel. P V Narasimha Rao followed through by establishing full diplomatic relations with Israel.
- Atal Bihari Vajpayee built on the foundation and ended Delhi’s reluctance to host the Israeli Prime Minister. But the UPA government, under pressure from the left and Congress’s confusion over the Middle East, went back to pious posturing and drawing the veil over deepening security ties with Israel.
- But current government, discarded Delhi’s traditional inhibitions on acknowledging the growing convergence of interests between India and Israel. PM Modi also became the first Indian PM to visit Israel.
Adopting the policy that is closer to the realities on the ground.
- Second, the NDA government has sought to align India’s position closer to the realities on the ground.
- While past government continues to believe that Delhi must bear (or at least pretend to) the cross of the “Palestinian cause”, the NDA government has come to terms with the fact that several Arab countries have begun to make their peace with Israel without preconditions.
- The violent religious extremism of Hamas and other forces threatens not only Israel but also moderate Arab states in West Asia.
- These shared concerns have opened much space for cooperation between Israel and several Arab states.
- However, The NDA continues to support a two-state solution to the crisis in Israel-Palestine relations
Balancing the ties with the Arab countries
- Third, the political focus on India’s current solidarity with Israel masks the extraordinary transformation of Delhi’s ties with the Arab world in the last decade.
- For all its rhetoric on supporting Arab causes, the UPA government struggled to modernise the relationship with Arab countries.
- Under the NDA, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt have emerged as important strategic partners. If India was hobbled by its mercantilist approach to the oil-rich Gulf in the past, the gulf nations promise to contribute massively to economic growth.
Recognising the role of west in west
- Fourth, the NDA government ended India’s traditional anti-Western stance in the Middle East. Limiting the Anglo-American role in the Middle East was among the main objectives of Indian diplomacy in the Nehru years.
- Today, India is in a quite different place; it partners with the US, Israel, and the UAE in the I2U2 grouping.
- Delhi has teamed up with the US, Europe, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE to build a corridor between the Subcontinent and Europe through the Arabian Peninsula.
- India’s unambiguous critique of Hamas terror puts it on the same side as the West, even as Russia, China and much of the Global South offer a wishy-washy “two-handed” reaction to the terror attack. The clarity of India’s response underlines its interest-driven foreign policy.
Conclusion:
- As the current tragedy propels the politics of the Middle East into a new and dangerous moment, one thing is certain the region demands greater Indian contribution to its stability and prosperity.
- The Indian political class, in turn, must shed its self-referential discourse without respect for structural trends in the Middle East and build a new national consensus on engaging the region.