Today's India stands to be a breeding ground for pseudo elements like - pseudo-liberals, pseudo-seculars, pseudo-hardliners, pseudo-religious sects, pseudo-activists, pseudo-law abiding citizens etc. thus, making the future look less promising due to unaccounted growth in subversive political activities, out of which most of them are "internal" in origin.
By IndraStra
Global Editorial Team
"Subversive Political Action - A planned
series of activities designed to accomplish political objectives by influencing, dominating, or displacing individuals or groups who are so placed
as to affect the decisions and actions of another government." -
Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, U.S. Department of Defense 2005.
In the current
dynamics of unfolding political tactics, it becomes imperative to understand
the continuity and changes in the way political actions are mechanized and
operated. Of which, one of the most evolving facets is that of political
subversion, that is, defying the existential norms by an act of ignorance,
violation or revisionist tendencies to change. Thereby, what calls for
subversion for a state, becomes a revolution for the subversive actor. For instance,
terrorism and insurgency, are subversive political activities that exemplify
this complexity in defining what entails being subversive.
Applying the
theory of subversion to the current Indian context, it can be stated that at
present, India stands to be a breeding ground for pseudo forces, such as
pseudo-liberals, pseudo-seculars, pseudo-hardliners, pseudo-religious sects,
pseudo-activists, pseudo-law abiding citizens, and others. And thus, the infusion
of such elements makes the future look less promising given the unaccounted
growth in subversive political activities, of which, most are "internal" in origin.
The Influence of
Subversive Political Activities on a Nation's Foreign Policy:
Foreign policy
is the sum total of official external relations conducted by an independent
actor (usually a state) in international relations.[1] It includes not only
aggressive or defensive military action but trade and cross-border humanitarian
interactions as well. When trying to analyze the role of the head of government
in foreign policy decision-making, it is important to know what is motivating
him or her. Depending on the political system of the head of government, the
influencing factors will vary. For the head of the government in a democracy
such as India, the consensus of the office and public opinion always plays an important role, whereas, in an authoritarian rule like China, the state has the
monopoly in decision-making, which may not meet the public consensus but entail
a long term national agenda.
Demoralization
Factor:
Subversion is
perhaps most closely associated with Cold-War era, mass-based, Marxist-Leninist
groups. While it is certainly true that communists from the time of Lenin
onward have used subversion, a wide variety of other violent underground
movements still continue to employ these tactics. But, in India's context, it's the history that lies at the very roots of its own civilization, which in itself
stands more than a thousand years old.
Case Study:
India was the Soviet Union's Subversive Political Activities Laboratory
According to
Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov, a translator of Soviet Economic Aid Group to India
during the 1960s [2], the Soviets, in purchasing Indian manufactured goods, would
pay the Indians only in rubles. Unfortunately, rubles are the non-convertible currency on the international market, which means that the Indian manufacturer
would be unable to purchase anything on the international market with his
Soviet rubles. On the other hand, the Soviets would take the Indian
manufactured goods and sell them at a substantial profit on the international
market for “hard currency” such as dollars or pounds which are easily
negotiable. That is, the Indian manufacturer received only a fraction of the
actual worth of his product, while the Soviets reaped the rewards of their
duplicity.
Video Attribute:
Yuri Bezmenov's Lecture on The Art of Subversion (1983)
"Is it that
the Indians are stupid, ignorant people, that they allow the Soviets to deceive
them in this manner? On the contrary, for the most part, they are innocent
victims of one of the world’s most sophisticated eon games Ideological
Subversion." - Yuri Bezmenov's Love Letter to America [2]
Video Attribute:
Yuri Bezmenov's View on Soviet Subversive Political Activities in India (1983)
Destabilization
Factor:
A cognitive approach assumes that a complex, and realistic psychology drives human
reasoning and decision making. It does not assume individual awareness,
open-mindedness, and adaptability as relative to an “objective” environment, but
rather assumes that individuals are likely to view their environment
differently and operate within their own "psychological environment".
[3] From the above definition of cognitive decision-making, the most important
driving force is the 'environment', which in this case, involves the political
environment. Even for an individual decision-maker, his or her cognition is
likely to be influenced by the political environment in which he or she is
operating in.
Given this, the
'2015 Patel stir' in Gujarat is indeed a classic case of "Front Group led
Subversion Activity" in the form of "Civil Unrest". To gain
public credibility, attract new supporters, generate revenue, and acquire other
resources, dissident and insurgent groups largely undertake political
activities that are entirely separate, or appear to be entirely separate, from
the overtly violent activities of those groups. [4] Sometimes this is achieved
by infiltrating political parties, labor unions, community groups, and
charitable organizations.
Working in and
through existing organizations, which provide a façade of legitimacy that might
otherwise, be unobtainable, terrorists and insurgents can bolster political
allies, attack government policies and attract international support. For
those situations in which infiltration is too difficult, terrorists and
insurgents may establish their own front groups—that is, organizations that
purport to be independent but are in fact created and controlled by others.
As with
infiltration, fomenting riots, organizing strikes, and staging demonstrations
can have a corrosive effect on the power, presence, and capabilities of the
state. Such unrest is first and foremost an affront to a governmental authority,
and the failure to suppress it can have damaging political repercussions for
the state by demonstrating that it is incapable of living up to its fundamental
responsibility to maintain public order. At the same time, however,
overreaction by the security forces can play into the hands of terrorists and
insurgents by seeming to confirm the opposition’s claims about the
fundamentally repressive nature of the state. The death of demonstrators at the hands of the Gujarat Police during the stir helped incite and radicalize a faction of native young
people, who came to believe that the Government is against the people of a particular community which forms a majority in the state of Gujarat.
Countermeasures:
Distinguishing
subversion from legitimate expressions of political dissent is a problem only
for democracies; as for totalitarian regimes, all opposition is inherently
subversive. [5] To build a thorough understanding of the subversive
underground, counter-intelligence operations will necessarily be directed
against a wide range of anti-government groups, some of which will be adversely
affected by these intelligence forays. [6] Here, counter-subversion also
entails more than just simply identifying subversives and subversive
activity—it may very well require repression. [7]
According to
Robert Thompson, - "[i]t is not the aim of the intelligence organization
merely to penetrate the insurgent movement. Its aim, inside its own country,
must be the total eradication of the threat." [8]
And in the judgment of David Galula [9], intelligence operatives should infiltrate
subversive organizations "to disintegrate [them] from within." [9]
For democratic
states facing substantial subversive threats within its borders (like in India)
- the first line of defense is the first line of offense enacted by banning all
kinds of political activities on university campuses that are directly linked
with any political parties, religious sects, or any sect which fuels subversion.
Instead of that,
the country should promote fraternity-based affiliations (like in the U.S.) which
consider both academic and extra-curricular achievements as one of the
priority factors to take a role in the nation's future leaders. That's how
Americans have always delivered "multiple lines of succession" at all
levels of democracy. For the last 250 years, it has maintained sanctity
without indulging in any form of cult-based leadership figures and figurines.
The requirements
of a vigorous counter-subversion campaign will create painful dilemmas and
undemocratic consequences since counter-subversion will almost certainly
collide with the rights of free speech, free association, and related
liberties. In the case of authoritarian regimes facing serious subversive
threats (e.g., China), their rulers are likely to dismiss human-rights
objections to their operations on the ground that such actions are essential
for national survival, which they justify as the need for regime survival.
Conclusion:
Subversion is
far more than just an intelligence problem. Along with the academic-researcher
class, well-trained, professional law enforcement agencies - both local and
national, attuned to domestic conditions and capable of building and
maintaining strong relationships with the public can play an invaluable role.
But if such forces are to be effective, they will also have to be trained to
identify patterns to “connect the dots" so, that subversive activity can
be spotted and neutralized.
At the same
time, the people of a country have to keep away the domestic anti-national elements
(of all types) from all the factions of governance by franchising their voting
rights effectively. At last, people's mandate is the only effective weapon
against any type of subversion.
Subversion is an enduring feature of political history, but like other aspects of the phenomenon, it has not changed much since the era of “Chanakya”. Thus, it is
the task of practitioners and analysts to identify the nature and scope of
these changes and seek to maneuver the needs to wage effective
counter-subversion in the future.
References:
[1] Hill,
Christopher. (2003). The Changing Politics of Foreign Policy. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan
[2] Schuman,
Tomas / Bezmenov, Yuri (1982), Love Letter to America
[3] Neack,
Laura. (2008). The New Foreign Policy- power seeking in a globalized era (2nd
Ed.). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc
[4] Rosenau,
William (2007). “Subversion and Insurgency”, Prepared for the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, Published by RAND Corporation
[5] Revel,
Jean-François, “Can the Democracies Survive?” Commentary, June 1984
[6] Spjut, R.
J., “A Review of Counter-Insurgency Theorists,” Political Quarterly, Vol. 49,
No. 1, January 1978.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Thompson,
Robert, Defeating Communist Insurgency: Experiences from Malaya and Vietnam,
London: Chatto & Windus, 1967.
[9] Galula,
David, Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice, New York; Frederick A.
Praeger, Publisher, 1964.
NOTICE: This
article contains the extracts from RAND Corporation Reports under Limited
Electronic Distribution Rights for Non-Commercial Distribution Only.
