The Indian military’s alleged human rights abuses, shielded by a heavy-handed anti-separatist law, 
are provoking resentment in Manipur:
… there is the seething grievance against the Indian troops and paramilitary forces that saturate the state, and particularly against the sweeping powers they are granted by the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, which allows them to search, detain and interrogate anyone suspected of guerrilla activity…Manipur erupted in anger against the law after the killing of Thanjam Manorama in July 2004. Ms. Manorama, 32, was taken from her home in the dark of night, shot dead and left in a field. Semen stains were found on her underwear, according to reports in the Indian news media. The military said she was a militant and challenged a state government inquiry into her killing, citing the Special Powers Act. An army spokesman said in a recent interview that there was no conclusive evidence of rape.
The attack against Ms. Manorama set Manipur boiling. In one of the starkest acts of protest the country has ever seen, nearly a dozen elderly women stripped themselves naked, stood in front of the military base in Imphal and held up a haunting imperative on a homemade white banner: “Indian Army Rape Us…” [Link]
The alleged murder-rape reminds me of a similar U.S. army case in Okinawa. In classic repressive style, foreign journies are banned:
Foreign journalists must have permits to even set foot in the state, and those are only rarely issued. India’s home minister, Shivraj Patil, in an interview earlier this year offered this justification for the virtual prohibition against foreign journalists: “Because you are so interested…” [Link]
<
p>Manipur is the state where zealots burned its library of rare texts because they were displeased with the language in which they were written:
In early July, Naga protesters set fire to dozens of government offices across the state. In April, a mob from another ethnic faction, angered at the use of Bengali rather than Manipuri script in official documents, burned down the state library here in Imphal, the state capital… [Link]
<
p>
The roots of the long-running, low-intensity conflict:
Like Kashmir in the north, Manipur was a princely state under British rule, and its incorporation into Indian territory in 1949, two years after independence, remains a sore point among many Manipuris. More than a dozen ethnic armies operate here, each with its own separatist agenda… In the half-century of conflict, India has poured in troops and money. But neither seems to have stanched political grievances or everyday misery. [Link]
In general, I favor politically-negotiated reconciliation over secession in most ethnic conflicts. Larger economic units are almost always more successful than smaller ones due to economies of scale, and every nation has the right to defend its territorial integrity. But lesson #1 in anti-insurgency is to starve a rebel force of support by winning over the host population. I don’t know enough about this conflict to say whether the article is accurate, but the tactics reportedly in use seem totally counterproductive to winning the war.
In recent history, I suspect that the loss of popular support for the militancy was the main factor in quelling separatism in Punjab. That was a self-inflicted wound for the militants. It seems far more significant to me than granting carte blanche to cops to torture and kill young Sikh men without trial, both the innocent and the guilty.
It’s not killing brutal terrorists or fighting secession which I object to. It’s the imprecision and immorality of sweeping up and killing the genuinely innocent. The ‘mistakes will happen’ excuse is total bullshit when lives are at stake: detaining for investigation is vastly preferable to shooting first, asking questions never.
Manish, I think it is unfair to draw a parallel between Manipur and Okinawa. We are not invading any country, we are well within our own borders. There is an elected governement there and the government (both Manipuri and Central) is fighting seperatists.
Indian Army accused of rape ?!?!
no wayyy, get out of here…. cough cough
… let me clear my throat …
Hmmm, yes, I get it! It’s ok for the Indian military to rape desi…err, women of Indian nationality but not ok to rape women in other countries like those dirty Amreekans.
Please.
They have done similar things in Indian controlled Kashmir and have largely alienated the local population. Its a terribly ineffective way of fighting an insurgency.
OK… Neha beat me to it but wow man!!… how should I put it JJ… that remark was thought-challenged.
I totally believe that we are all capable of the same atrocities given the right circumstances – appalling as the abu ghraib and gitmo scandals have been – it speaks hugely of the american that (s)he was genuinely outraged – on the other hand – the fewness of such reports coming out of India is suspicious – not that I doubt the Indian journalists are any less intrepid – but the army just exercises blanket bans in coverage – and there is lack of public appetite leaving little funds and incentive for journalists to pursue such blots to the fullest extent.
however bad things seem… I still believe the system works…
I remember reading the case of Simranjit Singh Mann – I believe a Sikh IPS officer who was humiliated and tortured by the police as part of the crackdown – he came through, contested an election and won a seat in the Parliament. More than the system it speaks much of the man that he chose to work within the system and worked it to the max. Quit rolling your eyes guys… I admit to being a bit of the misty-eyed kind – so if I’m aggrandizing to the point of caricature, feel free to correct me with facts.
Please learn to diffrentiate between the Indian Army and paramilitary forces. Most criminal acts that the armed forces are accused of are comitted by the paramilitary forces controlled by the home ministry. In the case of Manipur it is the Assam rifles which was accused in the incident.
Please think twice before dragging the Army’s name through the mud after every such incident.
There is a definate ethnic aspect to this activity, but DONT forget PAKISTAN’s strategy of bleeding India plays a major part in it. PAK is involved here too may be not as much as the Kashmir.
but DONT forget PAKISTAN’s strategy of bleeding India plays a major part in it.
What does it have to do with the rapes ?
Nothing. But where-ever there is Army or for that matter a large group of armed men present, crimes such as rape are going to occur. At least, Indian Army has procedures to deal with criminals in its ranks.
My comment was to point out the bigger picture. The root cause of the insurgency.
crimes such as rape are going to occur
I havnt heard of any rapes happening in Afghanistan by the American troops or by the Israelis in Palestine.
Just cause you didn’t hear em doesnt mean they didn’t happen.
If no foreign journos are allowed in Manipur, how about old fasioned news gathering? Go in there without telling anyone, and get your info, whatever it may be.
I cant remember any rapes by British troops in Northern Ireland either.
(sarcasm alert) note to self – send missive to ladies in photo above correcting them. Start letter with “Ha!Ha! you dupes.” (sarcasm alert off)
I do hear your point – not all bad eggs – have uncle and friends in the indian army who’ve served in kargil, Sri Lanka, maldives – slagging them is slagging myself – but to believe that about 10-20K gun-toting males in a position of power, with a sense of “us and them” in an alien territory , will behave properly in all circumstances all the time … now that’s a stretch – general buggery generally ensues
Its very hard for me to believe that in the so many years of Israeli conflict there has not been any rape incidents. Afghanistan has at the most a few hundreds soldiers at one place due to the small number of soldiers and sparse population. We didnt know anything about Iraq rapes until Abu-Gharaib came out. By your argument either Indian Army is not disciplined or Indian men are predatory by nature. I have hard time to accept both of those.
This comment is unrelated to the brutality of army or paramilitary soldiers, that speaks for itself.
Ancillary issue: Self-determination is a nice thing. But whats up with bumblechod states like Manipur asking for independence? They just won’t be economically viable. Its not like any of them have tremendous natural resources or facilities to manufacture products. Just not practically feasible
They have done similar things in Indian controlled Kashmir and have largely alienated the local population.
RC: I consider it pretty obvious that the Indian military and/or paramilitary forces are nowhere near as well-trained or disciplined as the Israeli forces are. It would be strange if that weren’t true.
It is not true that rapes are the norm all the time, everywhere where there is armed conflict. One cannot ignore the role of ideology and the role rapes play in disciplining and humiliating a population perceived as enemy.
On “ideology”: consider the fact that in WWII, the Nazi army committed comparatively very few rapes on the Western front, and the same army committed rape on a massive scale on the Eastern front. The difference is grounded in Nazi ideology: Western European peoples were “Aryans”, and the enemies there were ideological: those opposed to the Nazi project, lefties, assorted others, etc. On the eastern front the enemy was not just Communism but also “the Slavic race,” conceptualized by Nazism as inferior, almost sub-human. These people could be treated with impunity the way it just wouldn’t do to treat the French, Belgians, etc. Note that the very fewest rapes were committed against the Nazi’s most obvious victims, namely the Jews. Again the reason is grounded in ideology: although Jews like Slavs were seen as racially inferior, the Jews–unlike the Slavs– were also conceptualized as possessing the power to “taint” the German race; hence sexual assault or any kind of sexual contact with Jews was strongly disfavored.
Coming to the Indian example, although there is no official ideology to mark “others” as inferior, the ethnic make-up of the army vis-a-vis the insurgents introduces an ethnic element. The second prong– namely the utility of rapes in terms of humiliating/disciplining an “enemy” population– remains applicable, and is regularly practised in the sub-continent. The “ideology” this prong testifies to is of course an anti-feminist one (of the “shame a people by shaming their women; and the ‘ultimate’ shame is you-know-what” etc. etc.)…
Umair Mujahir, Same thing was being said by chest thuping FOX news watching ‘patriots’ about the best trained and best disciplined in the world US army personnel… before Abu-Gharaib story broke.
<
blockquote>”I consider it pretty obvious that the Indian military and/or paramilitary forces are nowhere near as well-trained or disciplined as the Israeli forces are. It would be strange if that weren’t true.”
Do you have any proof about this ?? or just one of LEAPs that you made in your following comment.
“RC: I consider it pretty obvious that the Indian military and/or paramilitary forces are nowhere near as well-trained or disciplined as the Israeli forces are. It would be strange if that weren’t true.”
Indian army has a wicked streak (despite your or mine relatives serving/ served the army), is seriously hurting for good, disciplined people.
India Today writes about that all the time. They have a new rule that if you were selected in one of the national (JEE, etc.) exams, you can use that result to gaurantee your admission to NDA, equivalent of West Point in India – to attract talent.
We all have to condemn such acts no matter what. You cannot use FOX-style rhetoric and try to justify.
Umair Mujahir is correct in his analysis. Over the years, I have also read in history books about the politics of humilation.
Whether you agree with the methods by Isreali forces or not, they are considered to be the best trained and most disciplined. Maybe, you should read the Jane’s Journal.
Thus spake the Wise One to enlighten thy brown self. Lead thee to our salvation with your Infinite Wisdom in all matters Indian, Israeli and Military, O Wise One!
They have done similar things in Indian controlled Kashmir and have largely alienated the local population.
must be from the Mujahideen literature Pakis distribute. Which makes couple of crime(which doesnt go unreported in Indian Media) eyery year look genocide of Kashmiris going on.
Vick, Go read http://www.hrw.org The rapes committed by the Indian army in the Kashmir valley are well documented there. Stop living like a patriot and start living like a human being.
Its very hard for me to believe that in the so many years of Israeli conflict there has not been any rape incidents.
Well, believe it because it is true. I am not a big fan of the IDF and their house demolitions, snipers and general brutality. However they have never been accused of committing rapes.
By your argument either Indian Army is not disciplined or Indian men are predatory by nature. I have hard time to accept both of those.
The Indian army is not as disciplined as the American, Israeli or any first world army. They are poorly trained, fed and compensated when compared to a first world army.
Umm. Yeah. That actually is a wise statement.
From Human Rights Watch, Reports of rape by Indian security forces in Kashmir emerged soon after the government’s crackdown began in January 1990.112 Despite evidence that army and paramilitary forces were engaging in widespread rape, few of the incidents were investigated, and fewer still resulted in criminal prosecutions of the security agents involved. In 1994, in response to international pressure, the government made public several courts-martial of soldiers accused of rape.
Why is it so hard for Indians (and patriots of other nations) to accept the fact that their country men (including the military) sometimes commit heinous crimes ?
Because they’ve tied their self-esteem so closely to a national symbol that it threatens their entire world-view and sends them into denial.
Oh, too much information. The answer you were looking for was “because they’re true patriots” 😉
Why is it so hard for Indians (and patriots of other nations) to accept the fact that their country men (including the military) sometimes commit heinous crimes ?
Err why is it so hard for enlightened people such as yourself to accept the fact that the occurrence of heinous crimes ISN’T being denied; the argument is about whether these rapes are part of a deliberate strategy adopted by the Indian army
SMR: I do agree with you that there is a distinction between an organized campaign of rape and incidents of rape. However, I disagree with Vick’s comment that what we have here are a couple of crimes a year, blown out of proportion by the media. The prevalence of rapes by Indian military personnel in insurgency-affected areas is alarmingly high, the numbers of reports appearing in human rights groups far too many: in Kashmir in the early years of the insurgency; in the North-East in kind of a lower-key chronic way for a lot longer (I take these reports seriously; it was they who after all were among the first to publicize that what was happening in East Pakistan in 1971 was not rapes but an organized campaign of rape by the Pakistani military). The crimes by Indian military personnel do not make for an organized campaign, but they do testify to apathy at the highest levels, an attitude that “such things will happen.” As proof, consider how many people are court-martialled much less punished for such crimes; the figure is abysmally low. I realize that the Indian army does not have the money to train soldiers the way say Germany does. But it does not appear to me that it’s a question of mere money; the political will to take strong measures against rape is lacking. This will is lacking in Delhi as well as in Manipur or Kashmir; but the more extreme situations present in Manipur or Kashmir mean that the consequences are more severe there.
Err why is it so hard for enlightened people such as yourself to accept the fact that the occurrence of heinous crimes ISN’T being denied; the argument is about whether these rapes are part of a deliberate strategy adopted by the Indian army
So as long as the rapes are not a part of a deliberate strategy adopted in writing by the Indian Army and signed by the President and the Chief of Army, everything is just fine and how foolish of Manish to waste space on this non story.
The crimes by Indian military personnel do not make for an organized campaign, but they do testify to apathy at the highest levels, an attitude that “such things will happen.”
Agreed.
india does pretty good for a third world nation with large swaths of basketcasedom though. but highlighting such acts are the necessary preconditions for modern civilization (ie; muslims who simply define radical terrorists out of islam are not really modern because they don’t have the maturity to confront reality, warts and all, face to face). ie; murder always happens, but in some premodern societies many interpersonal murders are simply disregarded because they are part of familial vendettas or part of an honor system (like dueling in the USA in the early 19th century).
Stop living like a patriot and start living like a human being.
Razib: I agree that “highlighting such acts are the necessary preconditions,” but not for “modern civilization” (whatever that means; the Nazis were modernists par excellence, as are other fascists too), but for India to live up to its ideological and constitutional commitment to pluralism (in this context, i.e., for women too). I would thus respond to Al Mujahid’s comment about living like a “human being” versus living like a “patriot” by stating (call me old-fashioned) that there need not be an opposition. I consider myself patriotic when it comes to India, and it is precisely because I do so that I consider it especially offensive when Indians in uniform– representing the state– act thus.
UM, well, i said modern civilization. there can be modern barbarity obviously!
So as long as the rapes are not a part of a deliberate strategy adopted in writing by the Indian Army and signed by the President and the Chief of Army, everything is just fine
Well, going by the standards set by The Finest Military Force In The World (TM), this would certainly be the case, wouldnt it? Yes, I get the sarcasm in your quote, but how ironic is it that Rummy and the gang of thugs actually had their lawyers including Gonzalez, had them write a legal opinion to sanction torture. Here’s an HRW link: http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/us0405/3.htm
And now the same dude is going to be bush’s Attorney General! Since there is now such known instance of a sanction for rape/torture in the Indian establishment, wouldn’t that make the Indian Army morally and ethically superior to The Finest Miliary Force In The World (TM)?
Stop living like a patriot and start living like a human being
Aha, the delicious introduction of a false dichotomy – the hallmark of a losing argument.
Indian army has never been accused of what happened in Abu-Gharaib. If that is first world army than I hope India never gets it.
You just assumed that I or others approve of rapes by Indian army. We have another thread going on discussing how people just “assume” things.
I strongly denounce rape and other atrocities by the Army. My initial point was that Indian Army has a procedure to handle “CRIMINALS” amongst its ranks. You are also ASSUMING that its a stated policy of Indian Army to “rape” women of Meghalaya state. There is no proof of that.
As opposed to your first world Army which made humiliation of people in Iraq and in Gitmo as its policy. As chronicled by Seymour Hersh in this book There are four star generals on record asking to Gitmo-ise Abu-Gharaib .. its all there in Hersh’s book.
And ‘lage hathon’ (while we are at it) let me rant about this too .. 2.5 months of expense of staying in Iraq would cover all re-building costs in Luisiana, Mississipi and Alabama. And Bush is asking people to donate money .. what about our tax money he is squandering in his stupid Imeprial project.
India has a pretty decent human rights record for a third world nation. In fact show me a third world country with a better human rights record, and more freedom of press.
Now that said, the human rights violations and freedom of press in india are far worse than most first world nations including ‘the great satan’ America.
I do think there is a segment of people (cough… arundhati roy… ) who expect India to have a stellar human rights and freedom record and remain a third world country in other regards. I think that is an unrealistic expectation.
Indians as a group — especially those living back in the subcontinent (it tends to happen more amongst the older generation overseas, though, rather than the 2nd-gen crowd) make a very big deal about the supposed superiority of Indian culture, Indian values, and (most of all) Indian morality in comparison with the rest of the world.
If this attitude includes people within the Indian military and the Government, perhaps they should put their money where their mouths are and effectively deal with the incidence of rape and abuse by the military, if it really is as widespread as is claimed. Talk is cheap. And moral hypocrisy has a very nasty stench to it. So much for “Saara Jahaan se Acha”.
Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that actually a part of Islamic Shariah Law, or at least originating from there ? If so, what the hell is it doing being included in secular Indian jurisprudence ? Common sense indicates that not all women who are raped will necessarily have two male witnesses. (And why only males ? Isn’t a female witness’s testament regarded as valid ?)
Yes the Indian army has been involved in Human rights violations including rape. I can’t speak for the army but as much I know as a someone who has worked alongside with them in J&K and Afganistan, I can tell you that there institutions within the army and the National Human Rights Comission (NHRC) that look into these issues and several of them have been punished. The penality for rape in perticular in India (both civil and military) is death.
Our (Indian) armymen are not saints, at the same time they are not devils either. They are human and when they do a crime, they are tried and punished faster than civil courts.
As to why foriegn media is not allowed into North-Eastern states, there are two reasons, one; not just media personal, but all forieners are not allowed in to these areas because of the ongoing operations there and it’s not safe. Two; every country has the right to control the access of foriegn media personal within its borders if it feels that terrorists/trouble makers would use them as a propoganda tool.
Once again, I can’t speak for the army, I was never in it and my association with them as been purely logistical. But as an Indian I can tell you that none of us go to bed feeling proud of how many women our armymen raped in different parts of the country.
Jacob: You wrote: “Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that actually a part of Islamic Shariah Law, or at least originating from there ? If so, what the hell is it doing being included in secular Indian jurisprudence ?”
You are correct that this rather unjust requirement originates in Islamic Shariah law; however, it is not correct that this is included in Indian jurisprudence. I take it you are referring to the Muslim Personal Law, which IS included in Indian jurisprudence; however, by its very terms the Muslim Personal law as incorporated under the aegis of the Indian constitution does NOT apply to criminal matters. Thus there never has been a requirement under Indian law that a woman produce two male witnesses in order to prove that she has been raped. The Muslim Personal Law in India applies only to civil matters. [By contrast, in Saudi Arabia a woman would have to produce two male witnesses, as there Shariah is in force in criminal matters as well].
But as an Indian I can tell you that none of us go to bed feeling proud of how many women our armymen raped in different parts of the country.
Amen.
Epoch wrote: Now that said, the human rights violations and freedom of press in india are far worse than most first world nations including ‘the great satan’ America.
One can’t generalize about “third world” or “first world nations”. I do agree that India’s DOMESTIC human rights record is far worse than that of “first world nations”; but what about foreign human rights records? For instance, France’s “record” in Indochina, Algeria, and its shameful role in the aftermath of the Rwanda genocide (check out Philip Gourevitch’s book We Wish to Inform you that Tomorrow we will be Killed with our families) does not do it credit– and all this in the last 50 years. And that’s just one example; consider the UK: in the post-WWII period, let us consider the tactics used to crush the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya in the 1950s. Now these countries don’t have human rights problems abroad, but wait, isn’t that in part a function of the fact that they aren’t fighting foreign wars or aren’t engaged in foreign colonial projects? I don’t think these records (for which no apology has been tendered, and no reparations paid; at least West Germany paid $100 billion to Israel over 10-15 years after 1948) are anything but shameful.
You lump all the “first world” countries together when it comes to “freedom of the press”; the assumption is that they are all the same– in the sense that they are all pretty “good”– but one has to adopt a view that is both broader and more nuanced. Consider: Spain till 1975 was ruled by a fascist dictator and rigidly restricted press freedoms and practiced censorship on films, TV programs, etc.; in Italy until the 1960s and 1970s it was quite common for books deemed offensive by the Catholic church to be banned; ditto for Ireland– yet these are all first-world countries. As is clear from my other comments in this thread, I am not blindly justifying or defending India’s human rights record– but we must get out of this “first” and “third” world rhetoric; such parameters breed complacency (the idea being that one really can’t expect anything better from certain sorts of countries). But one can and one must, because often the problem is political. Consider the case of Pakistan, which has a similar traditional social set-up to India, similar levels of economic development, and similar patterns of economic distribution: yet in 1970-71, the army (since we are on the subject of rapes) carried out an organized campaign to rape as many Bengali women as it could (in the words of the unfortunately but aptly named General Tikka Khan, the next generation needed to have less Bengali blood); exact figures are hard to come by (given the reluctance of women in Bangladeshi society, or of their families, to admit to such things), but no serious person doubts that the figures run into the several hundred thousands. This is not because Pakistan is predominantly Muslim and India Hindu, or any such thing; this is because the Pakistani army was allowed to and was in a position to implement its POLITICAL agenda unchecked. On the evidence before us, there is no equivalent/analogous agenda on the part of the Indian military to rape (probably because, however much Indians are fond of cursing their political leaders, corrupt civilians controlling men-with-guns is always better than no-one controlling men-with-guns). I don’t think merely considering the issue through an economic lens is useful, without a consideration of the politics involved.
An aside, in response to earlier comments on Israel: I lived for 17 years in an Arab country, and no matter what the level of propaganda was, even the government-controlled press in that country never suggested– not even once that I recall– that Israeli soldiers were raping large numbers of Palestinian women. Maybe there are some cases, but I have never heard of even one. That is not because they are less predatory or better than anyone else, it is because they are superbly trained and highly efficient. In fact that is PRECISELY one of the biggest problems with Israeli atrocities against Palestinians: things like demolitions, uprooting trees/orchards belonging to Palestinians, giving protection to settlers who steal land in the West Bank etc., can never be explained away, because they are ALL part of an official policy or practice. And in such cases I am not in favor of court martialling anybody, because the whole ssystem is to blame. What is needed in such cases is a political change. In India, the equivalent political change that is needed is for the whole system to get serious about rape (I mean, has anyone been reading the news stories that emanate DAILY from Delhi????); Kashmir and Manipur are part of a wider and systemic problem– as the same human rights reports cited in this thread will attest to on the question of Dalits, agricultural workers, police-rapes, etc….
I guess this is an oversimplification of the solution, but some suggestions for possible ways forward would be:
To change the “corporate culture” of the Indian military and police force, so that it becomes a point of honour for everyone concerned to never rape or assault women under any circumstances.
For Indian society as a whole to change its “blame the victim” mindset, especially with regards to the physical abuse of women. Rape is NEVER justified, no matter how the woman is dressed or how she behaves, and certainly not as a “weapon of war”.
Change the “might is right”, the “ends justify the means” mentality.
People need to stop behaving in corrupt ways towards others and generally have greater respect for their fellow human beings, rather than simply looking for ways to “cheat the system” if they can get away with it or if they can justify their malicious behaviour (especially if they think their is some explicit or tacit approval of their nefarious actions).
Stop admiring cynicism and corruption. This attitude is less prevalent amongst those of us born and brought up in the West, but it is still fairly common back in India. I also sometimes think that if such people feel that, as a result of living in a socially/politically-corrupt society,they cannot be successful in some goal by being “straightforward” or generally honest, they believe they have no choice but to be corrupt/dishonest/selfish in their behaviour.
I think that the teaching and encouragment of a high standard of behaviour in a uniform fashion (at least in terms of human rights and respect towards women, along with recognition of women’s fundamental equality with men) within Indian schools could help to inculcate a better mindset from childhood onwards.
The Indian media — both mainstream films and satellite/cable channels — can also potentially be a powerful force for good and the encouragement of positive societal transformation within the country. (Less “saas-bahu” serials espousing abnormally ego-driven behaviour and excessively conservative attitudes would therefore also be a good idea).
no comments