Other
- +5
Frances Z. Brown, Zainab Usman, Erin Jones, …
{
"authors": [
"Aqil Shah"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "SAP",
"programs": [
"South Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"South Asia",
"India"
],
"topics": [
"Democracy"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
The Dog That Did Not Bark: The Army and the Emergency in India
The Indian military chose to stay out of politics when Indira Gandhi imposed Emergency rule, despite numerous factors that might have facilitated an intervention.
By Aqil Shah
Published on Oct 17, 2017
Source: Commonwealth & Comparative Politics
In June 1975, Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi imposed Emergency rule, capping off a decade long process of the ‘deinstitutionalisation’ of the founding Congress party, increased social mobilisation, and political instability – factors generally considered conducive to military intervention in politics. Organisational factors encouraging military praetorianism, such as military involvement in internal security missions and the growth of ‘rival’ paramilitary institutions, accompanied this process of political decay. But the Indian military did not exploit this window of opportunity. This article offers an institutionalist explanation of the military’s political restraint based on two factors. First, institutionalised mechanisms of civilian control, forged during the critical juncture following independence, insulated the military from politics and the politicians from the military despite the weakening of the political system under which these were created. Second, military internalisation of the norm civilian supremacy, continually reinforced via professional socialisation processes, acted as an internal barrier to military role expansion...
This article was originally published in Commonwealth & Comparative Politics.
About the Author
Aqil Shah
Former Visiting Scholar, South Asia Program
Aqil Shah was a visiting scholar in the South Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- Global Views of Biden’s Democracy Summit
- Pakistan’s “Moderate Taliban” Strategy Won’t Hold Up—For AnyoneCommentary
Aqil Shah
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- The Le Pen Verdict: How French Politics Turned MAGACommentary
Far-right leader Marine Le Pen can—and will—run in France’s next presidential election. What does the outcome of her appeal against a 2025 embezzlement conviction mean for the country’s political future?
Catherine Fieschi
- Taking the Pulse: Has Meloni Broken MAGA’s Civilizational Axis?Commentary
When Giorgia Meloni very publicly rebuked Donald Trump’s disparaging remarks about her, it surprised many who saw her as a European extension of Trumpism. Is the spat a sign of trouble in the radical right’s transatlantic axis?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Taking the Pulse: Are Western Democracies Failing Free Speech?Commentary
The battle over free speech has taken center stage since U.S. Vice President JD Vance accused Europe of censorship. From travel bans to social media regulation, especially around the Israel-Palestine conflict, are liberal democratic governments weaponizing free speech?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- EU Enlargement Forgets EuropeansCommentary
Preparing candidate countries for EU membership is no longer enough. As the enlargement process becomes a reality, the union must also prepare its own societies.
Iliriana Gjoni
- Taking the Pulse: Was it Right to Boycott Eurovision?Commentary
Five countries staged the biggest political boycott in Eurovision history over Israel’s participation. With the FIFA World Cup and other sporting or cultural touchstones on the horizon, are boycotts effective?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
