Why does nobody like us?

At a personal level, Pakistanis, Nepalese, Burmese, Tibetans, Sri Lankans like us tons more than they like the Chinese. We are a likeable people. As are our neighbours. Yet, we are out and China is in. We are refusing to say it as it is. This is not a new story. It’s an unending Chakravyuh which we deal with like ostriches, our heads buried in the sands of sheer apathy.

Let’s start closer home.  We have had trouble in our own North-East for a very long time. Under the British there was no such thing. They were beautiful tribal people and yet it was us, not the British who permitted missionaries to “modernise” them. There are any number of regulations controlling the infamous ‘inner-line’ that Indians often don’t know about, who can go, who cannot and on what terms. And we have this evangelism, this proselytization which has put paid to more vibrant tribal cultures than I can count. Indians have the art of live and let live as proven by centuries even if the resulting tolerance is born of apathy rather than indulgence.  Our administrators, while copying the British, had and still have no sense of the British application of mind to the environment and local communities; nor do our bureaucrats have the stealth of the Chinese bureaucrat. India as a democracy is not run by its people.

Then came Pakistan, our brother till the then yesterday; part of the same regiment, bosses and “mulazims”, neighbours and next day, the enemy. PoK and a 70 year war much like medieval Europe ensues. Later, the virtual expulsion of our own from Indian side of Kashmir. Why should the other side not feel strong enough to try for more? If we are clawing back with removal of bad Articles, we are also clubbing it with removal of Statehood. To substitute a bureaucrat with democracy is the worst way to do it.

Next came China. I am talking before 1962. Shanghai had Sikh policemen, Parsi business houses in early 1900s and 2000 years ago, there were Hindu temples and a Tamil local population. China, in fact, has a Hindu lineage to its name. Nothing survives. The dismantling was gradual but brutal in the 1950s. It was our decision to accept it, not even ask for compensation, instead say bhai-bhai that possibly contributed to 1962. At no point have we stood up.

Little Burma came next. Early 60s. 3 million Indians fully integrated in to that society, who still cook and speak Burmese at home, be they Sikhs, the most advantage taking of the British prod to Indians to go out.  Out.. No compensation. Accepted.

Sri Lanka, ideologically, mythological united, now a no no. Complex and many factors running over a long time.

Nepalese were fully integrated with us at all levels and there was even common religion and military oneness. In fact, Nepal was the only Hindu Rashtra. Then it changed.  But socially and culturally it remained integrated.

The space in the article doesn’t allow more than broad brush strokes, but what has happened now with China is part of a long story.  The ability to manage and stand up.

Today everybody spits at India. And gets away.  It’s not Chinese money.  Money helps but it is how we are represented.

Now the Chinese come again. They definitely have taken 2-3-4 km of space. 20 people just don’t die like that. It also means the place was unmanned.  Why? And why are Army Commanders telling us to talk. What shall we talk? Why should the Chinese give up anything in a talk? What’s the Army for. Why isn’t it doing its job or not being allowed to?

What’s our retaliation advice? Don’t copy Nehru for he failed, because he spoke without preparation and so people we, not being sure of our preparation, are saying the same thing.  A lot of us. Don’t let history repeat they say. But inherent in the silence and the talk of their ‘logic’ is give up the places taken. No. Lose it. And even that temporarily. What’s so great in a localised fight? Can’t the Army do it? It can’t be like an Elephant's tusk. It must eat with the teeth it has. I am sure since 1962, we have learnt lessons, improved. Or are we still a brave and beautiful man to man force and not an Army for an incursion. I have no doubt we are a prepared Army and if I won’t bet on my Army, what will I bet on?

Fight economically.  That’s just shifting the war, not avoiding it.  Our army is in a better shape than our economy.  Deny them market access?  It’s the Government decision makers and their L1 buying that’s giving them orders.  The rest is the consumer because we have not nurtured industry.  They have calculated this.  It won’t get you far.  Besides you have to be in war to be able to block trade officially.

If things are as grave that 2-3km cannot be retrieved, come clean and tie up like Europe, in   NATO like alliance. Stop living in worlds of ideologies without substance, where we are only being spat upon. Europe has lots of respect. Being clean has many good qualities about it.

There is a common thread to all this. The Indian bureaucrat. Starched. Uncharming, risk averse. Timid. Unable to motivate his bosses. Most of all, kicking the problem to the next generation when solutions lie in all these cases, including Nepal now, at that moment of time

I do nothing, I am safe. A champion only of an exam at age 23, an exam which in itself is no guarantee or benchmark of life long management ability, used as lifelong employment at full pay, pensions, postings, in the firm belief that they are creme de la creme. A view nobody else shares. A position whose base has been guaranteed by the Constitution as a major pillar. On such a pillar every house will give in, bit by bit. The Defence Secretary is responsible for the defence of India.

It is likely that at the very top the Army has perhaps been equally bureaucratised, possibly neutered, and reflects India. Beautiful people (read soldiers and field leaders) and a bureaucracy as its unworthy representative. Yes, yes, we all know of that super bright guy better than us. He or she will survive all formats of governance and has to be stopped from being used as an example of this form of governance.  There are experts to deal with each subject, episode, but there is a structure needed to get to the root cause. 

There is a political side, sure. Nehru and Modi love those who love them. They are not champions of a neutral bureaucracy as it was supposed to be. Indira Gandhi had the talent to surround herself with greats Militarily, she did not fret about 'civilian control', whatever that means, as if the Army man has another citizenship. She controlled with her eye brow. And gave space. Anywhere a leader can cover up for a million things but it’s the job of an administration to cover up for the leader. We don’t deserve this spit. We are a good people. As are our neighbours. We have a good case and bad lawyers.  Let’s not talk and pass this as the nth problem to the next generation. This is not about dove or strongman.  A structure with stealth is the answer.