One of the most difficult in human affairs is the quantification of the harm that certain types of actions cause or, conversely, the benefits they bring. This is because questions in respect of either tend to be answered within different frames of reference. An excellent example of this has been provided by the recent query by the Prime Minister's High Level Committee on Minorities about the number of Muslims in the Indian army. It can be treated as a simple enumeration issue, so that the counter-question to those who protest can be, "What is the harm in finding out?" After all, the US army keeps track of the percentage of African-Americans in its ranks, and it is well known that the percentage of Muslims in the Indian army is much smaller than their share of the total population. However, as experience has repeatedly shown, the fault lies not in the numbers but in the uses to which they might be put. So it becomes important to keep in view not just the question itself but also who is asking it. Clearly, there is a difference between a policeman asking about the locks on your front door and a known burglar asking about them. This is the main, and perhaps only, reason why it is necessary to be wary about eliciting information on the communal composition of the armed forces. | |
| This is not to say that the committee headed by someone as eminent as Justice Rajinder Sachar has mala fide intentions. Far from it. But responsible people must also bear in mind that this government has spared no effort in wooing the Muslim vote. The Congress is desperate to regain it in UP and the Left depends on it in its main areas of influence, West Bengal and Kerala. Another of its supporters, the Samajwadi Party, is looking to defend its share of the Muslim vote in UP. Given how low Indian politicians can sink, it is better to be safe than sorry. How long would it take for these politicians to set up a demand for reservations in the forces and then ram through a law just before the next general election? It would not matter to them one bit whether Muslims want to join the army or not. After all, no one is preventing them from doing so now. |
| |
| The other aspect is the potential harm that such enumeration might do to the way soldiers view each other "" in terms of religious and other identities. Soldiers are part of a very small set of institutions that are perceived as being pan-Indian, and nothing should be done that risks this. Where the army is concerned, the British after the 1857 uprising had deliberately segregated regiments along caste and communal lines. It was a classic policy of divide and rule as it ensured that an Indian identity would not emerge in the army, as it had done in 1857, except when it was required to fight imperial wars outside India. That is why a ban was imposed on recruitment on caste, linguistic, and religious lines in 1949, although regimental identities remain. Why start off something that may endanger the building of a pan-Indian force? It is therefore good that the defence minister, Pranab Mukherjee, has recognized the issue's potential for harm and taken necessary action. |
| |
|
| |
