Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Diplomacy. Its cultural, not only spontaneous.

The recent and unexpected visit by the Prime Minister of India, Hon. Narendra Modi to Pakistan had caught the whole world by surprise and created a storm of praise by world leaders who applauded this action towards lasting efforts for peace with Pakistan.

In contrast, there were politicians and political parties in India who criticized this trip venomously. And, there are those who are unable to understand either the purpose of this trip, or its implications, or the philosophy behind the whole effort.

To understand the efforts of the new leadership of India, one must go far back into the past, and visit the thought concepts of ancient Bharat (the land that is comprised of the current nations of India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri-lanka and the immediate neighboring countries).

The basic principal of the Bharatiya view of country and way-of-life is the “commitment to culture”. The nation known as India did not begin its existence from 15 August 1947, but had existed as “Bharat Rashtra” for aeons before the British rule and other foreign rulers prior to that. On this land; the threads of life, art, literature and philosophy that bind the people as one culture and as a homogenous entity of various castes and sects, have existed and never weakened through the times of foreign occupation and rule, and the forced imposition of Abrahamic religions onto the people of this land. This basic culture is an integral part of majority of Indians and it is the very foundation of cultural unity of Bharat.

Based on this fact; that Bharatiya culture is the foundation of our social unity, it follows seamlessly that our view of life is integral. The all-encompassing development of every individual can happen only when the body, mind, intellect and soul are developed simultaneously. When such efforts are constantly undertaken by individual citizens, then the interest of the individual is in automatic harmony with the collective interests of our society. Since the individual and the society are inter-dependent for harmonious existence, their mutual relationship has to be based on congeniality and cooperation. 

When the consideration of the individual extends beyond the ‘I’ to include ‘we’ and ‘our’ it leads to universal development, and unity of universal bonding. Thereby, the development of Society can be judged from the development of the Individual.

Bharatiya society is based on the four objectives prescribed in our culture; these being the pursuit of Dharma (responsible actions), Artha (acquiring wealth), Kama (fulfilling desires) and Moksha (liberation of the soul upon death). These founding principles of our culture guide every action of our people. Dharma is the force that holds all other objectives together, and regulates the changes in society over time. 

This concept of Dharma (responsible actions) has, many times in the past; given rise to Dharma-Rajya (the rule of Dharma) which in its simplistic definition can be considered the “Rule of Responsible Law”.

Dharma-Rajya is non-religious and non-sectarian. It is strictly, the rule-of-law. Such a rule of law is neither dictatorial, nor arbitrary, nor based on individual self-interest. Dharma-Rajya puts all its emphasis on duties and responsibilities and not only on ‘rights’. In such an environment where rule is based on duties supported by the needs of individual rights; the administrative, judicial and legislative institutions function according to the requirements of the Bharatiya culture and as per the law, and not as per the whims and fancies of individual leaders or outside the parameters of legally and morally defined boundaries of society.

When Institutions function as per Dharma-Rajya, it automatically leads to the strengthening of democratic principles and a commitment to democracy. Democracy is the only means of ensuring the rights of every individual and protecting these rights and dignity of the people. Democracy is an indivisible concept and as such in our Bharatiya mind-set it is not restricted only to the political arena, but also defines itself in the economic and social arenas as well. Democracy is sustained by dignity of the individual, which in turn is the after-effect of responsibility of individuals combined with the rights of the individuals. The one issue that has to be always ensured in such a situation is that the individual’s rights shall not be detrimental to the rights or interests of society, and that the rights of the individual and that of society are complementary to each other.

Bharatiya society values Freedom at all costs. Freedom is not only the life and soul of a democracy; but also of individuals, their society and their nation. Economic, social and political freedoms have to work together in tandem to assure the individual and the nation the freedom from conflicts. This can be assured only on the basis of long term planning of all aspects of governance, including foreign policy. Planning is always the means to reach an objective and not the objective itself. Such planning has to protect the basic values and beliefs of our culture and strengthen them continuously. Inspiration for overall development of the society and nation cannot come from objectives alone. For this, it is necessary to cultivate the commitment of the people; not only within the geographical boundaries but within the cultural boundaries of Bharat-Rashtra. For only then, can the nation achieve success.

The above philosophy is part of the strength of the Narendra Modi governance policy. This thinking does not stop at the boundaries of India. It encompasses the whole world. The Bharatiya philosophy has endured and survived countless attacks on it over ages, centuries and ancient time-lines. In the past this philosophy has spread itself to the current countries in Eastern Asia and also the Pacific Rim. The most important component of Bharatiya thinking is its commitment to peace. Dialogue can win more hearts and minds than bombs and bullets. This does not mean that our philosophy makes us shy away from war and violence. 

From the wars of Mahabharat to wars against British Empire, Bharatiya people have borne arms when required and sacrificed their lives for all of the above mentioned concepts. Some wars were won conclusively, leading to the establishment of Bharatiya empires (colloquially called as 'Hindu Empires') that spanned the entire Indian continent; many were lost, leading the people of Bharat into slavery and subjugation. 

However, our Dharma (concept of responsibility) still demands that we use all non-violent and diplomatic avenues to broker lasting peace with hostile neighbours before we are forced to sound the Trumpets-of-War to enforce our right to lead our way-of-life comprehensively.

Who is afraid of the Islamic State?

The question that we should really ask is, “Why are we afraid of the Islamic State, aka ISIS?”

The reason is more about the thinking process of our collective mind-set, rather than the actual risk that ISIS poses to the world. Is the Islamic State a dangerous entity? Of course it is, but mostly to the people of Iraq, Syria, Turkey and nations adjoining these three. The dangers posed to other countries across the oceans are minimal and fractional as compared to the real dangers already existing there-in.

It is a matter of “Perceived Risk v/s Actual Risk” that we face as a society; that influences our thinking and thereby influences our fear factor. Research has shown that there are four reasons why some risks are perceived to be more lethal than they actually are in reality.

1.    People over-react to intentional actions and under-react to disasters and accidents. That is why people in India panic over the fact that a handful of Indian youth are joining ISIS (remembering that terrorist attacks that have killed about 4,500 people on an average every year over the last ten years) and completely ignoring railway accidents (that have killed and keep killing approximately 15,000 people every year). 

      Terrorist activities are intentional actions while railway deaths are thought off as natural accidents, therefore every small act connected to terrorism grabs people attention while railway accidents don’t capture our thoughts in same manner.

2.    People over-react to incidents and acts that offend their morality. When people feel insulted or are angered by acts that question their way-of-life, they react with anger, fear and a need for action.

3.    People over-react to what they consider as immediate threats (such as radicalization of youth and surge in religious rhetoric) while under-reacting to threats that kill over a period of time (such as medical deaths) or have become a natural part of life (deaths due to accidents and / or negligence).

4.    Human brains process every sudden event on the “fight or flight” perspective. But if the rate of change is slow enough, this change will not have a major impact. (In the past the use of foul language in public used to draw out the anger of the general population, but over the last 15 years, foul words have crept slowly into the vocabulary, and the mix of foul words during conversations no longer offends the majority of the people).

5.    Especially in India, people have the tendency to exaggerate rare or non-frequent risks and ignore common risks. They worry more about being killed by bombs and bullets, than getting killed by contagious diseases; even though various diseases claim many more lives.

6.    In daily life, there are many hidden dangers that kill an average Indian. From disease, to railway and road accidents, to diabetic strokes and heart- attacks. Yet, people under-estimate the risks that they take on willingly and over-estimate risks in the situations that they have no control over.  When people have to take a risk voluntarily, they usually under-estimate it. When forced to take a risk, they tend to over-estimate it. Terrorists seem to be considered fearsome because they attack at their own convenience and without advance warnings. The fear-factor arises from the thinking that as individuals we cannot stop terrorists; but that as a society the combined might of the people should be capable of stopping them; which in their minds ends up being the responsibility of the Government.

In the final analysis, people over-estimate risks about those topics that are discussed in the news, at any given time. News, by its very definition is an abnormality in the natural course of a life-style. Endless number of fatalities by diseases and accidents never make the news headlines as much as one terror attack or news about recruitment by terrorists. While, it seems that news outlets like to use terrorism and its false narratives for TRPs, it is for us, the people to decide whether to be afraid of terrorism or to reject is as just another danger in the course of our life-style.

Paris attack on 13 November: Clinical Analysis

Paris: Most favored destination for Terrorist Attacks:

Now that most of the hysteria and excited assumptions of the attack on Paris are over, we should take time to clinically analyze this attack on a European cultural centre and its ramifications for the future. 

The attack on Paris on Friday 13 (2015) was the first multi-target, well coordinated attack on six different locations killed 130 persons and wounded 368. There was no advance information on the specifics of this attack since the usual internet chatter prior to the attack was missing. Informants deeply embedded into terrorist areas were also unaware of the plans; leading to a rising concern that the attack squads were trained to “go dark”, i.e. – use minimal communication and carry out their part of the attack without any contact to other attackers or their handlers. EU Intelligence services had already stated their suspicions that “professional squads of terrorists were inserting themselves into migrant groups from Syria and North Africa”; but the ruthless efficiency of the attacks caught everyone by surprise. 

Paris is the favorite target of terrorists.  Since 1961, more than 250 people have been killed and over 600 injured in terrorist attacks carried out by a variety of groups, the most recent being Algerian insurgents and Islamic extremists. The latest attack is significant in its disciplined multi-target approach and the extent of damage that was caused to life and property. While earlier attacks on Paris were the handiwork of various ideologies from the far left to the extreme right, Daesh (Islamic State) has targeted Paris for three unique reasons. 

Firstly, since Paris is considered by radical Islamist's as an epitome of debauchery and decadence; and hence needs to be punished for straying onto an immoral path. More so, it was in Paris that the famous slogan “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity” was first declared as the “Rights of Man and Citizens”; an idea that is deeply resented by the Islamic radicals. 

Secondly, it is considered an easy target with greatest opportunity to inflict damage. Given its porous borders with Spain and Italy in the south; men, guns and bombs can be easily smuggled from either the Mediterranean side or Bay of Biscay and into France. The fact that this specific group of Islamic extremists chose to base themselves in Belgium prior to the attack is a major indicator about their modus operandi to stay under local Intelligence surveillance networks.

Thirdly, terrorism is prominently a psychological war. The focus of every terrorist attack is to ensure a large enough amount of destruction, death and bloodshed to ensure that the incident gets global headline news. This creates fear in the minds of the people who are attacked and creates an illusion that terrorists can strike anywhere and anytime as it pleases them. The bigger psychological effect is on the Muslim population that supports terrorism. Every jihadi attack like 13/11 is considered a winning attack and leads to more recruits joining the ranks of terrorists and towards higher amounts in donations and funds received by terrorist organizations. 

Planning the attack on Friday the 13^th also seems to have a purpose. This date is known as “black Friday” in the West and considered unlucky. Though it is only a popular superstition in Western society, an estimated 17 – 22 million people are affected by a fear of this day, making it the most feared date and day in history. The terrorist attack on this day and date would reinforce the fear factor in the Western society, or so the terrorists hope. 

Every terrorist attack is a political statement by the attackers. In this specific case, apart from this being a revenge attack by Daesh on France for its participation in the bombings of Islamic State targets, the underlying reason is to embolden the fringe elements of Islamic radicals in Europe to increase lone wolf or wolf pack attacks onto the general public and cause disruptions in the western society and economy. We should not forget that the main export of the Islamic State is its ideology of merciless Jihad, and that is the real danger that the world needs to learn how to control, contain and defeat.

The French people did respond back immediately with a avalanche of social media response (the hash-tag portesouvertes or ‘open doors’) where on-the-ground people opened up their homes as safe sanctuary to those who were caught in the madness of the attacks, and viral videos of the residents of France singing their national anthem as they exited in a disciplined fashion from the venue of the soccer match which was attacked by a suicide bomber. The singular message from the People of France to the terrorists was “You may have broken the bodies of the victims, but not shaken the spirit of Libery, Equality and Fraternity”.

*****