Purulia bleached out

The British government making a strong pitch for the release of Peter Bleach, now serving a life sentence in a Calcutta jail, is understandable especially since his partners in the criminal act of waging war against the Indian state have already been released on the request of the Russian president three years ago. The act, it may be recalled, consisted of dropping arms from a civilian transport aircraft at night in West Bengal’s Purulia district, nearly eight years ago. Such cases do start intermeshing with major foreign policy goals for countries, especially in Europe-North America, on humanitarian grounds. But this has to be seen in the context of Denmark, which professes so much in support of the rule of law but has not co-operated in sending back the main accused and mastermind of the criminal act, Kim Davis, to face trial in India of a crime that he committed here.

Foreign policy like politics, some would argue, is the art of the possible. More important, the foreign policy of a country is meaningless if it does not promote national interests. These can normally be clubbed under one or both the broad categories of economic and security interests. Of course, it is not in our national interest to allow a criminal group to drop sophisticated arms and ammunition to militant or criminal groups and/or individuals in the country. Hence, exemplary punishment must be meted out to those who commit such serious offences. At the same time, we need to note that the UK government, at the level of the prime minister, has repeatedly requested the release of Peter Bleach. Our agreement “in principle”, therefore, must be judged from the perspective of what the British can or will do to accommodate our interests in their policy.

Apparently, and within the context of closer UK-India relations, London has categorically supported us in the issue of terrorism emanating from Pakistan. Some might even argue that this support has been even more forthright than that of the US. The UK appears to have also agreed to put the Hizbul Mujahideen, which claims to be an indigenous movement, on the watch-list of terrorist organisations. It is for the decision-makers in New Delhi to decide if this is adequate or whether a ban should merit the release of Bleach. But we need to ensure that a repetition of the Purulia arms drop does not take place. And if it does, our response should not have to rely on the last ditch initiative of a young air force officer alone, as happened in the Purulia arms drop case, but of a coherent system responding resolutely to a serious threat to national security. And, by the same logic, the people for whom the arms were meant in India also need to be dealt with under the law.