Armed 038; dangerous

That the army chief publicly indicated what his force had told the government in private 8212; soldiers and identity politics don8217;t mix and ignoring that means stirring trouble 8212; should hopefully somewhat lighten the onerous burden of the Rajinder Sachar committee. If the government does not instruct the committee to withdraw the Muslims in armed forces questionnaire even after this, we will know that this variant of 8220;minority welfare8221; policy can be dangerous. And then the Sachar committee will join a list currently headed by attempts to link the Iran/nuclear proliferation issue to Muslim identity. Politics and policy of these kinds are united by their chilling indifference to consequences that can follow from deliberately fracturing certain institutions8217; national identity.

Foreign policy was never really a matter of sub-national angst till Tehran found out recently that Indian politics has produced some of its finest spokespersons. The result is that we are looking at an unnecessary, immature and potentially divisive ruckus that will be glorified in the name of debate. The 8220;debate8217;s8221; sponsors are not asking whether a nuclear-armed Iran will be in India8217;s interest. Similarly, when the Sachar committee started badgering the army, it didn8217;t ask whether community classified soldiers were in India8217;s interest. The army is frequently required to put out communal fires 8212; that fact alone should have forewarned the government and the Sachar committee.

Both should be glad, in fact, no one8217;s really asking the bigger question: what is the direction of government policy? Assuming the Sachar report tells a comprehensive story about Muslim social and economic indices, would the government then have community-specific social expenditure plans? This newspaper had earlier reported a Central project on similar lines; proportion of welfare spending going to Muslims should match their demographic ratio. This is silly economics. It8217;s not smart politics either. Demands for other community-based welfare programmes could be only a few irresponsible political speeches away. What8217;s next? Separate Union budgets for every community?