Competitive Intelligence

Tactical, Operational & Strategic Analysis of Markets, Competitors & Industries

Early warning on insurgency- What the Indian government needs to understand to mitigate risks which create corporate risks for foreign investment in India.

Early warning on insurgency- What the Indian government needs to understand to mitigate risks which create corporate risks for foreign investment in India.

Some believe that insurgency is a military problem while others believe that insurgency is the result of outside interference while some others believe that insurgency is caused by poverty.

For this we need to understand the social, political and economic conditions that are exploited by vested interests. The breeding ground for insurgency could be because of either or some or all the factors. It could be because of breakdown
of traditional social organizations and customs because of cross cultural influences or because of rapid improvement in social, economic and political conditions or urbanization or industrialization or lets say in the case of India, vacuum created by the departure of a colonial power or it could be because of Indian government corruption, ineptitude or tyranny or due to political instability in the center as well as state governments, further widespread unemployment and
underemployment and poverty or deep social and economic divisions based on caste and class divide.

The root cause of insurgency which the government needs to understand is the intolerable inconsistency between that which people think that they have a right to accept and which they estimate they realistically are capable of attaining.

The gap which is created between value expectations and value capabilities is called relative deprivation. In India this is especially heightened by the great class and caste and religious divide.

Out of the frustration in the local population between that which people think that they have a right to accept and which they estimate they realistically are capable of attaining results in a gap called perceived relative deprivation.

Because of Indian government corruption and ineptitude and due to political instability in the center as well as state governments in not being able to address widespread unemployment and underemployment and poverty results in deep
social and economic divisions based on caste and class divide.

Out of this arise issues. What are issues? Issues are points in argument. These are the questions that have not been addressed by the Indian government. These become the focal points of discontent and even
insurgency.

What the government fails to understand is that these issues belong to certain groups and when these issues are not properly addressed because of government ineptitude or corruption that a certain sect of local population takes it upon themselves as to how these issues should be readdressed. Members of local population who realize that the government is incapable of addressing these issues take it upon themselves to affect the behavior of the local population by offering them utopia.

These insurgent leaders who advocate these issues become the rallying point for local population as the local population now starts to believe that which people think that they have a right to accept and which they estimate they realistically are capable of attaining which results in a gap called perceived relative
deprivation.

These issues advocated by groups become demands. Now if demands are properly addressed they result simply in the normal functioning of the political system. As it happens in India, issues which belong to groups which are inadequately addressed become demands which results in heightened perceived relative deprivation because of the frustration in the local population between that which people think that they have a right to accept and which they estimate they
realistically are capable of attaining thereby resulting in a gap called perceived relative deprivation.

The resulting frustration in the local population arises because there is a dilemma between that which people think that they have a right to accept and which they estimate they realistically are capable of attaining creates a gap
called perceived relative deprivation. This creates a suitable climate and potential for political violence.

As is the case of Indian political history there have been precedents that whenever local population resorts to political violence that it is only then that the government pays attention.

These issues belonging to groups advocated by opinion makers become demands and when these demands are not adequately addressed that have the potential for political violence develop legitimacy not in legal terms but on psychological terms result in popular support because of the frustration in the local population between that which people think that they have a right to accept and which they estimate they realistically are capable of attaining.

This results in directed focused political violence. This is where insurgent leadership takes over. The insurgents derive mileage because of the frustration in the local population between that which people think that they have a right to accept and which they estimate they realistically are capable of attaining which creates a gap called perceived relative deprivation. Insurgent leadership is quick to make the local population understand that there are issues which have not been addressed by the government. These issues belong to certain groups and thereby insurgents gather popular support by advocating their eligibility to address these grievances.

Then psychological operations are used by insurgent leaders who use human intelligence tools such as money, ideology, compromise and ego, and especially ideology to create loyal cadres with the ultimate objective to seize
political control.

What the Indian government fails to understand is that the government has yet not been able to understand the coercive potential of insurgent leaders which is greater than theirs.

The insurgent leaders advocate their causes and win over local population and attempt to break the links that bind the people to the government. This is because of the coercive potential of insurgents which is greater than that of Indian government and to achieve this the insurgent leaders destroy or try to destroy the legitimacy of the local government and thereby create legitimacy for their own leadership.

The popular support to the insurgency happens because of Indian government corruption, ineptitude or tyranny or due to political instability in the center as well as state governments, further widespread unemployment and underemployment and poverty or deep social and economic divisions based on caste and class divide.

Views: 58

Comment

You need to be a member of Competitive Intelligence to add comments!

Join Competitive Intelligence

Comment by Vivek Raghuvanshi on April 30, 2018 at 2:51pm

Early Warning on Insurgency -– What Indian Government Needs to Understand to Mitigate Risks Which Create Corporate Risks for Foreign Investment in India

GLOBAL BUSINESS ISSUES eJOURNAL Vol. 2, No. 211: Dec 5, 2012

 

JONATHAN P. DOH, EDITOR

Herbert G. Rammrath Chair in International Business, Director of the Center for Global Leadership, Professor of Management, Villanova University - School of Business

 

PAUL M. VAALER, EDITOR

Associate Professor of International Business, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities - Carlson School of Management

 

Advisory Board -Global Business Issues eJournal

 

MARY YOKO BRANNEN

Chair of Multicultural Integration, San Jose State University - Donald and Sally Lucas Graduate School of Business

 

NICOLAI J. FOSS

Professor and Director, Copenhagen Business School - Department of Strategic Management and Globalization

 

WITOLD JERZY HENISZ

Associate Professor, University of Pennsylvania - Management Department

 

MICHAEL A. HITT

Distinguished Professor, Joe B. Foster Chair in Business Leadership and the C.W. and Dorothy Conn Chair in New Ventures, Texas A&M University (TAMU) -Department of Management

 

ROBERT E. HOSKISSON

Professor and W.P. Carey Chair, Arizona State University (ASU) - Management Department

 

STEPHEN J.KOBRIN

Wurster Professor of Multinational Management, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

 

DONALD R. LESSARD

Epoch Foundation Professor of International Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) - Sloan School of Management

 

ARIE Y. LEWIN

Professor of Business Administration and Sociology & IBM Research Fellow; Director of the Center for International Business Education and Research (CIBER), Duke University - Fuqua School of Business

ANITA MCGAHAN

Professor and Rotman Chair in Management, University of Toronto - Rotman School of Management

 

RAM MUDAMBI

Professor and Perelman Senior Research Fellow, Temple University - Fox School of Business

 

SEUNG HO (SAM) PARK

Professor and Director, Skolkovo Emerging Markets Research Institute - Moscow School of Management

 

TORBEN PEDERSEN

Professor, Copenhagen Business School -  Department of Strategic Management and Globalization

 

RAVI RAMAMURTI

CBA Distinguished Professor of International Business; Director, Center for Emerging Markets; Bornstein Senior Fellow, Northeastern University - D’Amore - McKim School of Business

 

STEPHEN B. TALLMAN

E.Claiborne Robins Distinguished Professor of Business, University of Richmond – E. Claiborne Robins School of Business

 

ROSALIE L . TUNG

Ming and Stella Wong Professor, Simon Fraser University (SFU) - Beedie School of Business

 

ALAIN VERBEKE

Professor and McCaig Chair in Management, University of Calgary - Haskayne School of Business

ELEANOR WESTNEY

Scotiabank Professor of International Business, York University - Schulich School of Business

 

SRILATA ZAHEER

Professor and Elmer L. Andersen Chair in Global Corporate Social Responsibility, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities - Carlson School of Management

 

Comment by Vivek Raghuvanshi on April 16, 2018 at 4:01am

Early Warning on Insurgency – What Indian Government Needs to Understand to Mitigate Risks Which Create Corporate Risks for Foreign Investment in India

Nov 29, 2012 CONFLICT STUDIES eJOURNAL Vol. 6, No. 171

KELLY M. KADERA, EDITOR
Associate Professor, University of Iowa - Department of Political Science

BRIAN H. LAI, EDITOR
Associate Professor, University of Iowa - Department of Political Science

Directors

PSN SUBJECT MATTER EJOURNALS

DAVID A. LAKE
UC San Diego

MATHEW D. MCCUBBINS
University of Southern California - Marshall School of Business, Gould School of Law and the Department of Political Science

Advisory Board - Conflict Studies eJournal

BENJAMIN O. FORDHAM
Associate Professor, State University of New York (SUNY) - Department of Political Science

VIRGINIA PAGE FORTNA
Associate Professor, Columbia University - Department of Political Science

SCOTT SIGMUND GARTNER
Professor of International Affairs, Penn State - School of International Affairs

SCOTT GATES
International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO) - Centre for the Study of Civil War, Professor, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)

JACK S. LEVY
Professor, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey - Department of Political Science

KAREN A. RASLER
Professor, Indiana University Bloomington - Department of Political Science

KENNETH A. SCHULTZ
Associate Professor, Stanford University - Department of Political Science

Comment by Vivek Raghuvanshi on April 16, 2018 at 4:01am

Early Warning on Insurgency – What Indian Government Needs to Understand to Mitigate Risks Which Create Corporate Risks for Foreign Investment in India

Dec 6, 2012 POLITICAL ECONOMY: GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES & RELATED POLICIES eJOURNAL Vol. 5, No. 146:

MICHAEL C. JENSEN
Harvard Business School, Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP), Inc., National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)

Comment by Vivek Raghuvanshi on April 16, 2018 at 3:54am

Early Warning on Insurgency – What Indian Government Needs to Understand to Mitigate Risks Which Create Corporate Risks for Foreign Investment in India

Dec 7, 2012 POLITICAL ECONOMY: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY eJOURNAL Vol. 6, No. 187:

DAVID A. LAKE, EDITOR
Professor, UC San Diego
Directors - POLITICAL ECONOMY EJOURNALS
DAVID A. LAKE
UC San Diego

MATHEW D. MCCUBBINS
University of Southern California - Marshall School of Business, Gould School of Law and the Department of Political Science

Advisory Board - Political Economy: International Political Economy eJournal

RAWI ABDELAL
Associate Professor of Business Administration, Harvard University - Business, Government and the International Economy Unit

DAVID A. LEBLANG
Professor of Politics, University of Virginia

LAYNA MOSLEY
Associate Professor, University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - Department of Political Science

BRYAN PETER ROSENDORFF
Associate Professor, New York University (NYU) - Wilf Family Department of Politics

KENNETH F. SCHEVE
Stanford University

CHERYL SCHONHARDT-BAILEY
Reader in Political Science, London School of Economics & Political Science (LSE) - Department of Government

Free Intel Collab Webinars

You might be interested in the next few IntelCollab webinars:

RECONVERGE Network Calendar of Events

© 2018   Created by Arik Johnson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service