Expensive mistakes on national security (2)

A flip after the flop

And just one day after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh declared that his government has “no fixed, inflexible or ideological view” with regard to anti-terrorism laws, and that it was actively considering strengthening the legal framework in line with “global consensus”, his government has announced that it won’t be doing so after all.

“No, No, No. It is a draconian (law) and against human rights. If the present anti-terror laws are implemented properly, there is no requirement for additional laws,” Information and Broadcasting Minister P R Dasmunsi said.

“What do you mean by tougher anti-terror laws? Some of our laws are much more strong than those in the US and UK,” he shot back when asked whether the government was planning to bring in an anti-terror law similar to POTA. [TOI, emphasis added]

So this what what Dr Singh meant by not having a fixed and inflexible view. Depending on time of the day, day of the week and member of his cabinet, you get very different views. (Psst. Note that it is Mr Dasmunshi and not the home minister who is announcing these cabinet decisions, in the company of the home secretary.)

8 thoughts on “Expensive mistakes on national security (2)”

  1. And the Home Minister said he wont talk anything. “Why should I reply to all that abuse?” or something to that effect was what he said in a TV interview with Rajdeep Sardesai.

  2. The home minister is simply adopting Sarah Palin’s strategy; it’s not reasonable to expect politicians to talk to journalists if the journalists are bent on asking them questions.

  3. >> it is Mr Dasmunshi and not the home minister
    >> who is announcing these cabinet decisions

    Naturally, he is the Information and Broadcasting Minister. Whom do you want to broadcast information for GoI ?

  4. Shivraj Patil is almost as embarrassing as Morarji Desai picking his nose for the cameras at an international forum in the ’80s (heard from a desh-bhakt dude who watched the spectacle and was crowing about Indian Democracy up until then).

  5. @Invalid
    ‘Naturally, he is the Information and Broadcasting Minister. Whom do you want to broadcast information for GoI ?’

    Makes no sense. Why did Pranab Mukherjee and M K Narayanan talk to the media about the nuclear deal, then? Why does every department have a spokesman? Shouldn’t they all be ‘outsourced’ to the I&B ministry? You’re not really sure what the I&B ministry is all about, right? ๐Ÿ˜‰ It’s not exactly a large ‘spokesman’ department as you think…

  6. The Indian security establishment needs deep, systemic reform to enable it to effectively neutralise threats from non-state actors. Passing a new law will be like Nero fixing a broken string on the fiddle – it’ll make the fiddle sound better, but it won’t stop Rome from burning.

Comments are closed.