The world today faces crises on multiple fronts, driven by wars and border tensions. In this complex global landscape, India’s security strategy requires a nuanced and pragmatic approach. With a defense budget constituting approximately 1.89 % of its GDP, India struggles to meet the demands of its armed forces. Nearly half of this allocation is directed towards salaries and pensions, leaving limited resources for modernization and infrastructure.

Economic Constraints

India remains a low-middle-income country with a per capita income of around $2,900, ranking among the lowest globally. Comparatively, China, with a GDP nearly six times larger, is still categorized as an upper middle-income country. For India to transition to a higher economic status, it must allocate its scarce resources judiciously, avoiding unnecessary expenditures driven by overt displays of power and avoidable machoism.

Geographic and Strategic Challenges

India shares an extensive 13,000 km land border with its neighbors:

• Bangladesh: 4,000 km
• China: 3,400 km
• Pakistan: 3,300 km
• Nepal: 1,500 km
• Bhutan: 700 km
• Myanmar: 1,600 km
• Afghanistan: Approximately 100 km (disputed)

Additionally, India’s maritime borders connect it with Sri Lanka, Maldives, Thailand, Myanmar, and Indonesia.

Guarding this vast frontier demands significant resources, including troops, equipment, and infrastructure, which cost money. For instance, countering threats from Pakistan and its proxy war requires nearly half a million troops, supplemented by paramilitary forces. This immense commitment underscores the financial and logistical burden of securing borders.

External and Internal Security Interlink

Security issues in India are not confined to its borders. They intertwine with internal challenges, particularly given the strained relations with several neighbors, including Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, China, and Myanmar. Historical disputes, cross-border population movements, and ethnic ties add layers of complexity to border management.

Historical examples worldwide highlight the intricate dynamics between neighboring nations:

• US-Mexico: Cross-border migration and trade disputes.
• Ukraine-Russia: Territorial conflicts and political tensions.
• UK-France: Disagreements over migration and trade.
• France-Germany: A history of wars transformed into cooperation through sustained efforts.
• Israel and neighbors: Persistent territorial and political conflicts.
• Central Asian Republics.

India must learn from these examples and avoid actions that impinge on sensitivities and create regional instability, particularly when it has a warring neighbour which enjoys tremendous superiority .

Avoiding Machoism in Security Policy

Unnecessary displays of aggression or rhetoric can escalate tensions with neighbors and divert attention from pressing economic and developmental priorities. A balanced approach that emphasizes diplomacy, regional cooperation, and internal harmony is essential for long-term stability.

Internal Cohesion as a Security Imperative

Internal harmony is equally critical. Disrupting social cohesion or fostering divisions within the country can weaken its security framework, creating vulnerabilities that adversaries could exploit. Addressing economic disparities, fostering inclusivity, and ensuring equitable development are integral to strengthening both internal and external security.

Conclusion

India’s security challenges are multifaceted, encompassing border management, relations with neighbors, and internal stability. To navigate these complexities, the country must prioritize resource optimization, avoid provocation, and focus on building a robust economy. Strengthening internal unity and pursuing diplomatic engagement with neighbors will contribute to a sustainable and secure future.

If we do not strike a balance and manage our internal and external security challenges optimally our colossal security requirements can get out of control and lead us all to disastrous consequences.

The Army, in a post on X on Friday, conveyed its deepest condolences over the demise of Naib Subedar Giriraj Prasad Yadav. It stated, “A Naib Subedar of the Indian Army has made the supreme sacrifice in the bona fide line of duty within the operational area of the Dibang Sector of Arunachal Pradesh. General Manoj Pande, #COAS, and All Ranks of #IndianArmy salute the supreme sacrifice of Naib Subedar Giriraj Prasad Yadav, who laid down his life in the line of duty in #Dibang Sector, and offer deepest condolences to the bereaved family.”

However, the precise cause of his death remains undisclosed. It's notable that when the Army attributes a sacrifice to the "bona fide line of duty" in a specific operational area like the Dibang Sector of Arunachal Pradesh, it typically implies enemy action. Otherwise, if it were an accident, the Army would have surely provided clarification. This lack of transparency not only fails to serve the nation but also risks demoralizing both the soldiers and their families by not adequately recognizing their sacrifices.

Naib Subedar Yadav's sacrifice is just one example among many instances where crucial information has been withheld. Earlier this year, during an award ceremony at the Western Command, known as the investiture ceremony, deeds between September 2021 and November 2022 were honored. These actions, following the Galwan incident, hint at border skirmishes, as evidenced by citations indicating attacks on Indian Army posts by the Chinese. However, such information was swiftly removed from social media platforms by Army authorities.

Despite China's public assertions regarding parts of Arunachal Pradesh and physical confrontations with Indian soldiers, detailed accounts have not been made public. While the bravery and steadfastness of Indian Army troops are commendable, it's imperative that such actions are communicated transparently to the nation.

Since the Galwan incident in 2020, numerous meetings between the two sides have occurred, yet the nature of these negotiations remains unclear, as to what are we negotiating, particularly when PM himself in an all-party meeting in 2020, said “no one had ever entered Indian territory and there was no one inside.” is surely not understood.

 Statements from various government officials offer conflicting perspectives, while the Foreign Minister characterizes relations as abnormal, and the Chief of Army Staff describes the situation as stable but sensitive.

It has been reported that a research paper was tabled at the annual Director Generals of Police Conference organised by the Intelligence Bureau, by a police officer, which indicated that we may have lost access to 26 out of the 65 Patrolling Points on the Line of Actual Control in Ladakh. The paper obviously was not discussed at the conference, which was  attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union home minister Amit Shah and the government made sure the paper was taken off the web site.

The overarching concern is straightforward: if the Govt is hiding information just to preserve its own MACHO image then my fear is that this will further embolden the enemy, because When the enemy knows that you are hiding information from your own people, He squeezes you further and all this shall back fire.

Transparency is not just a matter of accountability; it's essential for national security and stability because it prevents own people falling prey to enemy's psy ops (propaganda machine). However, the more one hides the more harm it causes to its own force.

Did Lal Bahadur Shastri hid information in 1965 when hundreds of Pakistani troops had infilterated into Indian territory. Did Nehru hid information when Chinese troops were ingressing into India's territory in 60s. Do we not know how brutally we punished Chinese in 1967 at Nathu La, Did Mrs Gandhi hid information. 

EVERY WHERE in the country, on 26 Jul Kargil Vijay Diwas was celebrated, we remembered the young heroes who had fought gallantly and made the supreme sacrifice. And why not they deserve this RESPECT AND HONOUR, THEY HAVE EARNED IT.

But today I am going to dwell on a serious issue now.

For a student of Military history, if we leave aside 1947-48 , we were taken by surprise in 1962 by Chinese and they took away a sizeable chunk, in 1965 once again Pakistan took us by surprise both in Gujarat as well as in Kashmir by sending hundreds of infiltrators, thereafter we were taken by surprise by the civil uprising in Kashmir wherein hundreds of civilians were on streets shouting their lungs out azadi azadi, thereafter started a long saga of surprises, then came Kargil where once again Pakistan took us by surprise, and then came Ladakh in 2020-21 when once again Chinese took us by surprise and Galwan happened.

For more on this Listen to video ; https://youtu.be/iW99m7U5wHY?si=T0QxdQPndux4qOOi

In the pursuit of grabbing headlines on social media, governing with a hypernationalistic agenda can have far-reaching consequences, as exemplified by the recent events , India- Maldives.

The strategic importance of the Maldives in the Indian Ocean has turned it into a battleground for influence between India and China, leading to a dangerous situation with potential repercussions on not only India- Maldives relations but in entire South Asia.

The geostrategic significance of the Maldives has fueled a power struggle between India and China, both vying for a foothold in the region. India has traditionally enjoyed cordial relations with the Island nation, having thwarted a coup in the Maldives in 1989. The political landscape saw former President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih maintaining close ties with India, while the current President, Muizzu, found favor with China. Solih's opponent, Male Mayor Mohamed Muizzu ( current President) signalled a shift towards China, raising concerns about the possibility of anti-India sentiment gaining traction.

The anti-India campaign in Maldives gained momentum unexpectedly, with a targeted disruption during an International Day of Yoga event organized by the Indian High Commission in 2022. This orchestrated incident, reportedly supported by hardliner groups and the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), provided Muizzu with an opportunity to exploit anti-India sentiments in the run-up to the crucial elections in September 2023.

Parallelisms can be drawn to domestic issues, such as the rise of hardline elements supporting leaders like Mr. Modi in India. Muizzu capitalized on an 'Indian Out Campaign,' advocating for the removal of Indian troops from Maldives, a sentiment that resonated with certain factions in the country. China, recognizing an opening, seized the opportunity to advance its interests through infrastructure and connectivity projects.

Political posturing in India, particularly related to the Lakshadweep islands, became a target for criticism in the Maldives. This, in turn, led to calls for boycotting the Maldives by Indian celebrities and travel companies, exacerbating the diplomatic rift. So, the fallout extended beyond politics, affecting tourism ties between India and the Maldives

The Maldives controversy coincided with President Muizzu's visit to China, emphasizing the delicate diplomatic balance at play. The situation underscores several crucial points:

1. Hypernationalism's Pitfalls: Excessive nationalism, particularly that is based on RELIGION, whether in India or the Maldives, does not serve the interests of any nation ; both within and outside. It can lead to tensions and conflicts detrimental to all parties involved.In this case, it is China’s gain. 
2. The Domino Effect: Newton's third law applies not only to physical objects but also to politics ; Within and International. Hyper nationalism in one country triggers reactions elsewhere, as witnessed in the strained relations between India and the Maldives. Mr Modi's visit to Bangladesh few years back had lead to desecration of Hindu temples there.
3. Secularism as Strength: India's strength lies in its secular values, not religious fundamentalism. A departure from secularism could lead to internal as well as External challenges and diminish India's influence in the South Asian region. SAARC is already dead now. What is happening within the country today is getting telecasted allover and that is likely to have Newton's effect.
4. Government's Role: The government's focus on social media optics over substantive governance, is a cause of concern, as highlighted by Arun Shourie. He had said - "Indian Govt is increasingly not acting like a Govt but A WhatsApp Group", . The undue concern over perception management on whats app is like a media channel being concerned about its TRP. A more measured and strategic approach is essential to navigate complex international relations.

In conclusion, the Maldives incident serves as a cautionary tale against the perils of hypernationalism, emphasizing the need for countries to pursue balanced and diplomatic approaches to foster stable international relations.