Expert Speak India Matters
Published on Aug 03, 2020
If there is a learning to be made, it is that in the last one year, the absence of the internet has not helped in security, commercial, economic, health and educational success.
Killing militants or killing militancy? The internet and Kashmir One year ago, on 5 August 2019, the BJP-led government imposed major constitutional changes to the former state of Jammu and Kashmir, changing its relationship with the Union of India. At the time, the government shut down any and all communication in the Union Territory, in order to maintain security and as a preventive measure against any mobilisation of anti-state elements. A year later, the ban on high-speed 4G remains in place and forces the question: has it been worth it? In the days following 5 August 2019, a blanket communication blockade was imposed across J&K with landlines becoming nonfunctional and a mobile connection (prepaid or postpaid) being rendered useless. Over the next few weeks, certain security officials’ mobiles were ‘white-listed’ and landline services were resumed. By the middle of October 2019, postpaid mobile phones were made active, and by the end of the year, mobile internet in the UT of Ladakh was allowed. It took nearly five months for the Supreme Court to issue a directive on 10 January 2020, that the right to internet access was a fundamental right protected under the Constitution and that the internet restrictions in Kashmir must be reviewed. This resulted in low speed mobile internet being allowed and two months later, in early March, limited broadband facilities being restored. However, a year later, 4G mobile internet remains off limits.

A year later, the ban on high-speed 4G remains in place and forces the question: has it been worth it?

In a democracy, the government must state the reasons behind actions it takes, and examine whether those actions or decisions have been fruitful it achieving their objective. In the case of Kashmir, the government must state why the blockade on 4G internet remains imposed and whether the restriction has had a proportional and direct benefit to the security situation. The first is an objective statement of intent. The second statement, whether the internet has helped the security situation, is subjective and the government cannot be the only actor determining its success, although it has attempted to do just that. Since the start of this year, the government has made a series of statements, releasing figures and statistics to validate the claim that the security situation has indeed improved. In response to a petition filled in the Supreme Court seeking a restoration of 4G internet, the J&K government in May 2020 said that there had been only “108 terror related incidents” between August 2019 to April 2020, a sharp decrease from the comparative period a year before. Substantiating that claim, the police have stated that there has been an almost 78 per cent drop in law and order incidents since January 2020, compared to the same period last year; along with a 73 per cent drop in martyrdom of security force personnel. While these are positive and promising statements, they do not present the entire picture.

In a democracy, the government must state the reasons behind actions it takes, and examine whether those actions or decisions have been fruitful it achieving their objective.

These statements and statistics must be read alongside other simultaneous developments, regarding security and law and order, to get a more authentic understanding of the link between banning high speed internet and improving security. According to security officials, there has been a significant increase in the number of security operations being carried out since the start of this year, which has resulted in more local militants, rather than foreign militants being killed. This reveals two important things. First, the increase in security operations, along with the fact there have been a decrease in terror-related incidents since January 2020, tells us that the internet is a weapon that security forces rely on to carry out successful anti-militant operations. The Supreme Court directive in January that led to a restoration of 2G internet has been useful for security officials, as it allows them to combine source-based intelligence with technical intelligence, to carry out their anti-terror operations. The result is visible: armed with better intelligence that comes from the technological capabilities of surveillance and monitoring (internet availability) and communication with sources on the ground (fixed line and mobile connection availability), security officials can carry out more operations that are successful in thwarting attacks. Second, the fact that there have been more local militants killed, rather that foreign militants, demonstrates India’s continuing failure at defeating Pakistani propaganda. Instilling a ban on the internet, whether temporary or long term, does not force Pakistan to rethink its strategy for influencing, brainwashing and luring Kashmiri youth into jihad. On the other hand, the presence of 2G mobile internet, landline connections and broadband connections (although limited) have been more than enough for Pakistan to continue their propaganda against the Indian-state, using the restrictions on communication as fodder to fuel hatred amongst Kashmiri youth. The creation of new militant outfits, such as The Resistance Front, in an attempt to ‘secularise jihad’, are a ploy to project Pakistan-backed militancy as an indigenous movement, proving that Islamabad will continue to improvise and adapt, undeterred by any communication restriction, blockade or ban.

Restrictions on the usage of the internet, or internet shutdowns are a popular tool used by Indian governments.

Presently, given the global effects of the Covid-19 pandemic and nation-wide lockdown restrictions, the lack of high-speed internet, has hurt Kashmiris more than ever. Given that citizens remain indoors, doctors have begun undertaking online consultations to treat patients. Given that only sluggish 2G is available, this has posed great difficulties as doctors struggle to upload, download medical records, documents and video call with their patients to make the correct diagnosis. At a time when schools and colleges across the country remain closed, students have had to resort to online classes using applications that allow them to connect with their teachers, classmates through video. This has also proved to be a hurdle as students, teachers and parents find it challenging to stream classroom lectures and presentations with a slow internet and an unreliable connection. Along with a crippling health and education infrastructure, business enterprises and startups, have been also terribly affected with over 80 per cent of the people losing their jobs, much before the onset of the lockdown, as a result of loss of internet. Restrictions on the usage of the internet, or internet shutdowns are a popular tool used by Indian governments. It is not only the current government that uses it as a weapon to fight the spread of misinformation, fake news, radical or extremist propaganda but previous governments, both central and state, have found it a quick and relatively cheap way to battle the side effects and consequences of violent or possibly militant behaviour. However, in the case of Kashmir, internet bans have proved ineffective in stopping fresh recruitment. Nor have these bans managed to block Pakistan propaganda. In addition, the communication blockades remain controversial and disproportional. Hence the question, what else can be done? If there is a learning to be made, it is that in the last one year, the absence of the internet has not helped in security, commercial, economic, health and educational success. Instead the government must seriously entertain and implement ideas that result in a policy shift regarding how the internet in J&K. This includes taking direct input from local police on the ground, regarding what works and what does not, taking technological action with the help of social media and tech companies against Pakistan propaganda and utilising the power that 4G internet brings, to improve security and livelihood of citizens.

A blanket ban on 4G internet is ineffective in achieving its purpose and frankly, a lazy attempt to solve a problem that requires constant and active attention in order to strengthen and improve India’s security grid.

A smarter and more targeted strategy must include uninterrupted high-speed 4G internet, so that security forces can monitor social media posts of vulnerable youth, track locations and movements of suspected militants and shut down posts, videos and/or comments that instigate violence or hatred against the Indian state. A blanket ban on 4G internet is ineffective in achieving its purpose and frankly, a lazy attempt to solve a problem that requires constant and active attention in order to strengthen and improve India’s security grid. Perhaps, the most important policy shift should include changing our thinking regarding what contributes to a better security environment in Kashmir. In this regard, the government must understand that killing militants does not mean killing the militancy. A large number of militants killed does not mean that terrorism in the Valley is in free fall, neither does it mean that India has made some great progress. A reduction or eradication of militancy will require a long term, strategic rethink about policy decisions made in Kashmir and whether the internet should be viewed as a tool misused by terrorists or as a weapon that can be utilised by security forces themselves.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.

Contributor

Kriti M. Shah

Kriti M. Shah

Kriti M. Shah was Associate Fellow with the Strategic Studies Programme at ORF. Her research primarily focusses on Afghanistan and Pakistan where she studies their ...

Read More +