• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "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.

Link Copied
By Aqil Shah
Published on Oct 17, 2017
Program mobile hero image

Program

South Asia

The South Asia Program informs policy debates relating to the region’s security, economy, and political development. From strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific to India’s internal dynamics and U.S. engagement with the region, the program offers in-depth, rigorous research and analysis on South Asia’s most critical challenges.

Learn More

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...

Read Full Article

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.

    Recent Work

  • Other
    Global Views of Biden’s Democracy Summit
      • +5

      Frances Z. Brown, Zainab Usman, Erin Jones, …

  • Commentary
    Pakistan’s “Moderate Taliban” Strategy Won’t Hold Up—For Anyone

      Aqil Shah

Aqil Shah
Former Visiting Scholar, South Asia Program
Aqil Shah
DemocracySouth AsiaIndia

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 Endowment for International Peace

  • Article
    Promises Made, Promises Unmet: The NPP’s Struggle to Reform Sri Lanka

    Does the NPP have the will or vision to create a new social contract for Sri Lanka?

      Bhavani Fonseka

  • Article
    Will a UN Treaty on Autonomous Weapons Arrive Too Late?

    The final report by the Group of Governmental Experts is a key milestone toward a potential instrument regulating Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems and has garnered both accolades and criticism.

      Charukeshi Bhatt

  • Serbia election student list vucic
    Article
    Serbia Still Has a Steep Hill to Climb

    After two years of mass protests, Serbia’s student-led movement has ousted Aleksandar Vučić. Now the Student List must prove it can deliver on its promises.

      Dimitar Bechev

  • Capitol building from below
    Commentary
    Emissary
    What the New Democratic Congress Can (and Can’t) Do on Foreign Policy

    Democrats now have the gavel and the purse, but the executive branch still pulls the levers on the U.S. role in the world.

      • +10

      James M. Acton, Dan Baer, Mark Baldassare, …

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Is Russia Winning the Perception War in Germany?

    In Germany, competing perceptions of Russia are highlighting a tension between public opinion and government policy. In the country’s east, where division is widespread, populist parties are taking advantage.

      • Gwendolyn Sasse

      Gwendolyn Sasse

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie This Week
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie This Week
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.