Central Hall: India desperately needs its own Defence of India Act to deal with emergencies and war like scenarios

X: @prashanthamine

New Delhi: India desperately needs to have its own comprehensive law to deal with internal insurgencies and external threats posed to its national security in today’s electronic and social media driven world. India needs to have Its own Patriot Act, Insurrection Act, Emergency Powers Act, The War Measures Act or The Defence Special Measures Act, just as they are in the US, UK, Canada or Australia to name a few.

In an increasingly globalized world driven by an ever content hungry private television news channels and social media, information, disinformation, narrative setting in subtle ways is being done by your adversary using every possible media tool against you.

Some sections of the media, especially the private television news channels and now You Tube podcasters still seem to be afflicted by the 1990-1991 Gulf War syndrome. The coverage of the war by US and other foreign media houses of the US led Coalition forces military offensive into Iraq and to liberate Kuwait had captured the imagination and enraptured the media worldwide.

Despite the recent experiences of the 1999 Kargil war (May 3 to July 26, 1999) or the November 26, 2008 (26/11) Mumbai terror attacks, no lessons have been learnt in the ongoing coverage of Operation Sindoor launched on May 7.

No military in the world which goes into a military offensive against its adversary would ideally want to let its offensive drag on like the 20 year long Vietnam War (1955-1975).

In both the 1999 Kargil and 2008 Mumbai terror attacks the operations dragged on largely due to the live coverage of the events unfolding then which came handy for the handlers sitting in Pakistan. It was later revealed that even the 1990-1991 Gulf War coverage was a deferred telecast and not a live telecast. Meaning the telecast of the action unfolding on television screens was actually done a few minutes after the operation was executed in reality.

Even before Operation Sindoor was launched, some of our private television news channels had already barged inside Pakistan revealing in shrill decibels about terror hideouts with all the details that could even pale our intelligence agencies.

As Operation Sindoor was unfolding, a news anchor from a prominent Hindi news channel was seen/heard asking the retired army-man as to how the Indian Air Force (IAF) should respond to the drone attacks!

Almost 30 years ago, the Ministry of Defense used to conduct a course for media persons covering the Defense beat so as to familiarize them with the way the Armed Forces were structured, how they functioned without giving out any operational details and how to do reportage during any military operation.

The way, some television news channels these days report on military operations, especially the news anchors, the reporters and cameramen, it is high time that these media persons are given a crash-course or an orientation course on reportage of military operations. These days some in the foreign media have begun to show blurred images of army personnel and military equipment to conceal their real identity.

These days as is evident in the Operation Sindoor, social media is proving to be more often than not a nuisance. Some social media celebrities for the sake of channel hits are more interested in making reels, doing live streaming, or posting videos of troop movements and army jawans on their way to duty.

Modern warfare has undergone seriously drastic strategic, tactical, firepower and operational changes. Wars, conflicts and insurgencies are no longer being fought in the conventional way as it used to be till World War II.

Today, the theatre of war includes both conventional and non-conventional means, both state and non-state actors. Basically, anything and everything be it from water, to culture, to religion, sports, disinformation, spreading misleading information to provoke the people against their own governments, psyops, economic, space, infrastructure, trade and anything with which one can hurt, damage ones adversary without having to enter into a conventional war. And this can be done without considering any weather constraints or any other logistical nightmares.

During the Vietnam War, the iconic image of US soldiers running after a naked, crying Vietnamese girl, nicknamed “the Napalm Girl”, shook the conscience of the people and brought a swift end to the 20 year old war in 1975. Or the Fireside chats of US president Franklin D Roosevelt during the Great Depression and World War II from 1933 to 1944 shored up sagging public morale. The war-time speeches of Sir Winston Churchill made the British people resist the Nazi invasion.

Also Read: Central Hall: By suspending Shimla & trade accords Pakistan has conceded diplomatic victory, India further seals it by putting IWT & aviation agreements on hold

Information warfare is one of the most deadly tools that an adversary can unleash with devastating consequences.

The government needs to have laws in place to deal with emerging situations out of not just wars, rioting, arson, natural calamities, but laws to deal with situations that threaten national security and the nation’s very existence.

Today there is an alarming trend noticeable on social media where some people have developed a penchant for making reels and videos of crimes, security violations and heinous crimes, instead of first reporting the incident to the law enforcement agencies.

The United Kingdom has its own – The Emergency Powers Act, 1920, and The Emergency Powers (Defence) Act, 1939, granted the government emergency powers during times of national crisis.

The United States of America has had its own – The Insurrection Act of 1807, The National Emergencies Act of 1976, and The Patriot Act of 2001, provide for federal authority to address emergencies, including national threats.

Canada has had its The War Measures Act, 1914, and the Emergencies Act, 1988, which granted emergency powers to the government during wartime or other emergencies. Australia too has its own The Defence (Special Measures) Act 1940, which enabled the government to take special measures during wartime.

These acts often allow for the temporary suspension of certain fundamental rights, such as freedom of movement, assembly, and expression, during the emergency period. They typically grant the government additional powers, such as the ability to control resources, regulate economic activities, and detain individuals suspected of undermining national security. The primary purpose of these acts is to protect national security and enable the government to effectively respond to threats.

India too has had similar such acts both during the British Era and post-Independence.

The British had enacted The Defence of India Act 1915 and The Defence of India Act 1939, both to deal with the emerging situations out of World War I and World War II. The 1939 Act was a re-enactment of the 1915 Act. The 1939 Act that came into force on September 3, 1939, the day WW II began, was more draconian as it was also used to suppress the Indian freedom movement. Both the Acts were repealed after Independence in 1948.

After independence, a new The Defence of India Act was enacted in 1962 during the Sino-Indian War. The provisions of the Act allowed for the suspension of fundamental rights, detention of people of Chinese ethnicity and maintaining essential services. A similar Act was enacted in 1971 during the India-Pakistan War, or the Bangladesh Liberation War of Independence. But the said law was a temporary provision only meant for the duration of the emergency.

India today does not have a comprehensive law unlike those in the US, UK, Canada or Australia to deal with complexities of myriad modern day threats posed to its national security. India does need to have one such law to deal with omnipresent threats to its national security.