 |
||
|
||
|
||
It is unfortunate that even after 53 years of Independence political corruption has not come to stay. We will have to get along with all these mess until a responsible and mature polity emerges. But what is disturbing is that in the last couple of years, a new phenomenon has been emerging which can best be described as “Indian media imperialism”. It has arrogated to itself the powers to set the national agenda from national security to political and economic complexions and policies. Indian media’s adventure in these sensitive areas and some actions call for deep sense of responsibility and sensitivity.
India’s nuclear weaponization in 1998 and the Kargil war in 1999 provide two vivid examples of how this media coverage could be harmful to the national security. The Western media’s approach which had its agenda on nuclear non-proliferation was swallowed “hook, line and sinker” and the media here sought to project that India was not in need of nuclear weapons. At the height of the Kargil war, ridiculous analyses were made to explain that Indian Army was not ready yet or alive to the threat. Media’s faulty analyses on threat perceptions were proved wrong by the breakout of the Kargil war.
The Tehelka tapes are yet another example of a section of our media’s irresponsible behaviour where national security imperatives stand thrown out of the window for sensational gains rather than for any crusading conviction to set things right. By itself, the Tehelka tapes could have been dismissed as cynical attempt by an individual, but the way the senior generation of India’s media fraternity have sought to rally round Tarun Tejpal reflects sadly on their lack of realisation in relation to national security affairs. This is not to condone the politicians exposed in the tapes. But to pinpoint the fact that there is hardly any sense of guilt among the mediapersons about the morality of the operation or the negative impact it would have on the Indian economy, its stability or national security.
India’s national security stands endangered not by the revelation through Tehelka tapes but by the perceptions it sought to create public in the mind of the Indian that the entire machinery of the Indian state is rotten. It is unbelievable that in the sting operation, the investigation team did not come across anyone who had rejected outright the offer of wads of notes. Hence, someone who is out of the’ official or political domains should be appointed to investigate the veracity of the Tehelka episode.
National security is not to be trifled with or politicised. The Indian state today is engaged in tackling grave security challenges from both within and outside. The Tehelka tapes in terms of effect will impede all the important recouping of Kargil war attrition of military hardware, and even normal replacements and fresh purchases will take a back scat for a while leading to inadequate war preparedness.
The impending danger is that such tapes may cast doubts on the decision-making apparatus and cause doubts regarding the integrity of senior officers by rank and file. India can get another government it can get a new breed of journalists, but it cannot get another Indian armed force.
Was the timing of raking up this issue deliberate? It is well known that the media was not well disposed towards the current government for reasons best known to them. The Bofors case was coming to a logical conclusion. The current budget was considered progressive and beneficial to the economy. The tapes were said to be ready by January itself. Why then the delay?
If it was to highlight the political corruption, there was no need to subvert senior Indian Army officers by inducements of cash and liquor. It appears that all the officers are purchasable. Aren’t the journalists too?
Had it been happened in the United States and Britain, the Tehelka team would have been criminally prosecuted for the production of tapes and the means they employed. Knowing fully well that such laws do not exist in our land, the team resorted to a so-called journalistic venture without a sense of responsibility. Their intention and modus operandi are not legally justifiable or morally defensible.
No one questions the freedom of the press. The press at the same time are expected to follow certain ground rules. They cannot demonise or brutalise the entire national security apparatus of India. It is easy to point out Tehelka chief’s connections with venture capitalists, the Board of Directors who have their own axe to grind or the involvement of opposition politicians. One has to recall the Tehelka chief’s motivations from his own writings. In Delhi Diary column published in Outlook, he made remarks on India’s nuclear weaponization thus: “In a swift two months the entire region has been destabilised. In no time at all, the statesman-like finesse that characterised Indian leaders, the Nehru-Gandhi discourse that emphasised a benign nationalism, all that has been lost. And no one should buy the real politick pap. It is the smoke screen the political establishment uses to conceal- illogic.”
And further he said: “We suddenly sound like a brash frisky people. not an ancient civilisation; we suddenly sound very tinpotty like those third world countries which are full of loud posturings, very malevolent, very unwise.”
To borrow his words, the Tehelka tapes and the Indian media’s stand on these also sound “very tinpotty” and are ‘full of loud posturings, very malevolent, very unwise.”
Courtesy: South Asia Analysis Group
(The contents of this paper are
the personal views of the Writer-Director)
|
||
|
||
|
||