India�s Need of Perception Management: Countering LWE Propaganda and Agitation

Key points:

• LWE working within NGOs and welfare associations in to carry out ground agitation
• Intelligence agencies need data to separate criminals from sympathizers
• Individual states to cooperate by sharing data
• Government must increase perception management efforts

About a month ago Priya Pillai, an environmental activist was ‘offloaded’ from a plane bound for London by immigration officials, on the grounds that the she was among the list of individuals issued by Govt. of India who couldn’t leave the country; she was blamed for her intentions to ‘embarrass’ India and this event has raised debates between freedom of speech and patriotism [i][ii].Pillai was to speak against the companies that have been set up to mine coal under the forests of Mahan, alienating land and livelihood from the tribals in the state of Madhya Pradesh. She alleged that her trip was disrupted for the interest of the corporate in order to prevent the international platform from sympathizing with the ‘insensitivity’ of the Indian government[iii]. The government’s action leads one into asking that, when millions of users through social media are giving out statements to the whole world with poor ratification of facts, why single out the activist?

The tribal issue in India is indeed a sensible one with a particular connect to the subject of Left Wing Extremism (LWE) with the core driver being marginalization or lack of advocacy of the tribals in democratic planning. The introduction of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) law in the Indian Constitution is still seen as a saviour for the tribals who are both ignored and ignorant as the law now allows someone with both knowledge and skill to voluntarily act on the weak victim’s behalf. While voicing out opinions is constitutional, what has changed the scenario on ground is that the members of the extremist group have blended among the NGOs and other social welfare organizations, to instigate armed agitation from inside. The Daily Mail has  reported the Ministry of Home Affairs admitting that, although they have a list of about 128 such organizations on the radar of intelligence, they are yet to gather concrete evidence against those who are part of the Maoist network[iv]; thus resulting in an overall notion that  welfare activists are wolves in sheep’s clothing. Its difficulty is heightened by the rapid increase in the number of NGOs that operate in the country[v]. The Central Bureau of Investigation is reported to have data of only about 65% of the NGOs in India as several states have failed to provide the data. The intelligence agencies cannot arrive at strong conclusions without adequate data and can always be challenged as ‘baseless’ [vi]. Thus, the individual states must provide them the same.

While international pressure is an effective way of getting demands met for the minority, it may come with the question of sovereignty.  The government had made it clear to the Delhi High Court that it did not want Priya Pillai to speak about the alleged violations in the country before the UK parliamentary committee[vii][viii]. However, eventually she could address the conference through skype (an internet based application for video conferencing) and it has been reported later in Hindustan Times that during the hearing in Delhi High  Court  the government failed to defend their argument as to how Pillai’s talk in London would have been ‘anti-India’[ix][x]. Right and wrong aside, this reflects that the government has not only been disadvantaged in the ability by which it can confidently differentiate between the guilty and the non-guilty but also the disappearing gap between real-time and virtual-time has made it practically difficult, if not impossible, to monitor independent perceptions  of individuals that can significantly change its priorities. So the government needs to understand what it can and cannot do i.e. the limitation under which it must operate. It can punish those who commit crimes but it can’t punish someone supposing an intention. Thus, there are the guilty and there are those who are not; there is no one in between.

Kautilya advocates that while the strong will always attempt to destroy the weak and the weak will use cunning and revolutionary methods to balance the asymmetry in power[xi]. The streams of threat perceived have focused from military to nuclear and cyber domains but perhaps have neglected the power of words; which has been identified and used by the red rebels as a psychological warfare tool and this has been found to be rather effective. Thus, the government appears to have been cornered to a situation where it has to improve its perception management efforts and fight ‘rationale with rationale’. In this case of Mahan, the conflict has risen because the coal reserves below the forests are required for national development but is locally displacing or damaging the livelihoods of about 14,000 people who are present or dependent on the area[xii]. While managing perceptions are important, it is cannot be applied as a standalone approach;inadequate efforts on physical actions such as Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R) of the affected people will cause the state’s ‘rationale’ to appear as false hopes rather than plans. People’s lack of trust with such arrangements can be understood to root from the uncertainty of adapting into a new socio-cultural and economic environment. The government can make efforts to showcase the success of past R&R programmes. People in the grass root level will have to be made aware of the larger picture and significant benefits will have to be ensured for their cooperation as feelings of loss and unfairness as illustrated by Kornblum, arise when one gives more than one gets[xiii]. It has been argued that immediate benefits rather than long term ones are effective in winning the trust of the people in such situations [xiv]. The active engagement of the common people in dialogue with administration, policy planners and leadership is required foremost and the government can use the channels of communication themselves to increase the tolerance in the society against exaggerated propaganda. Education and transparency of the planning process down to the people will enable the common man to participate with a larger tool set to identify the legal means of claiming rights and confirm facts for themselves. Lastly, it is not the acquisition of the land but the procedure through which it is being acquired; people are reportedly being threatened and their signatures forged[xv] – this is fraud and coercion both of which as per Section 19 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 will make the agreement void in the eyes of law. Thus, the legal recognition of the people’s stake and protection of their rights can become the pillars of an effective bottom-up planning process.