Kashmir unrest ongoing cyber war
Kashmir unrest: In this ongoing cyber war,
everything to do with India is being demonised, says DGP SP Vaid
Amid the
dramatic focus on encounters, explosions and death tolls, the role of social
media narratives in shaping the unfolding scenario in Kashmir tends to go
unnoticed. SP Vaid, the state’s director-general of police, is one of the few
who acknowledges its importance. Even at a time when his force is under
extraordinary pressure — with lethal ambushes on the roads, attacks on homes
and threats to families, Vaid’s insight into this most dangerous aspect of the
challenge is crystal clear. "It is a cyber war," he says, cutting to
the chase.
That is a
refreshing change, because the police top brass has at times been a bumbling
apology for leadership in the past. At other times, grandstanding, jockeying,
and internecine sniping within the force have actually strengthened opponents
of the State.
Vaid
reveals that the Pakistan-based Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), led by Hafiz Saeed, has
put out advertisements calling on people to join the fight in Kashmir as 'cyber
mujahids'. He adds that Pakistan and the JuD have declared 2017 as 'The Year of
Kashmir'. Vaid says that 250 to 300 Facebook and Twitter accounts
functioning from Pakistan lead the cyber war. These and a host of others within
Kashmir have been "demonising everything to do with India" and
"mixing religion with politics and politics with religion", he says.
Vaid adds
that the dictum of these cyber warriors is that "if anyone speaks in
favour of India, bully him or her".
He claims
that, before this effort, the "vast majority is neutral". That may be
an exaggeration, but it is true that the majority in Kashmir was at best
ambivalent until four or five years ago. Indeed, apart from teenagers, it is
true again now, only the shrillness of the cyber war is an effective silencer
in combination with the firepower of militant guns.
No response
The cyber
war of which Vaid speaks has been vital for the mobilisation of the teenagers
who have been at the forefront of agitations and the new militancy since last
year. However, Vaid adds —correctly — that countering it is not the task of the
police. Indeed, many of those charged with handling things within the
state are keenly aware of the challenge, but do not know who should respond, or
how. They know equally well that the hyper-nationalist discourses on some
shrill television channels don’t help. Rather, they confirm the polarised
'they-want-to-kill-us' narratives.
A senior
figure in the intelligence establishment points out that no intelligence agency
has the manpower to effectively counter the exaggerated or false narratives.
"How many could we hire? Fifty? Hundred? Thousand?" he asks.
Additionally, he rightly points out that no matter how many workers an agency
of the government might hire for this task, those workers would treat it as a
job — they would stop work after hours. Those who engage in the cyber war
against the State have a mission: "They are missionaries! They
have commitment. They are at it night and day," he says.
Convincing arguments
Clearly
though, there are counter-arguments if one looks for them. Vaid convincingly
answers some of the points that have become a vital part of the narrative among
young Kashmiris over the past year. For instance, responding to the
narrative that the Indian State only uses pellet guns in Kashmir, and water
cannons in other states, Vaid insists that pellet guns were used during
agitations in Darjeeling over the past few days, and against agitations over
reservations in states like Haryana too.
Asked why
water cannons can't be used in Kashmir, his response is passionate: "I
would love to use water cannons!" But the water finishes in five minutes,
he explains, and the boys might then burn the truck. They would climb on to the
truck and chuck a Molotov cocktail into the cabin, he adds.
Bans don’t work
Vaid, who
took over the force at the beginning of this year, claims, "I have brought
the use of pellets (down) from 100 percent to five percent."
That is
good, but is unlikely to become part of the social media narrative. The cyber
battle remains almost entirely one-sided. The firepower deployed has biting
intensity, and the manpower reserves are endless. The State’s only
response is to ban. Neither the police chief nor the intelligence officer disagrees
when one points out that banning internet access did not work — whether in 2010
or 2016, or in April-May this year. However, given their inability to engage,
they will probably fall back on bans again.
Either
way, their opponents win on this most effective war-front.


Post a Comment