A Tale of Two Lockdowns

The Modi government is culpable for two separate lockdowns over the past two years, one in the occupied territory of Kashmir and one on the Indian mainland. Hardly six months apart, both lockdowns have exacted a monstrous toll on innocent populations. The lockdown of Kashmir was part of an orchestrated social engineering programme that typifies fascist regimes, while the lockdown of the mainland was a botched move that equally typifies fascist governments in its disregard for lives and livelihoods. Yet it is difficult to tell which of these lockdowns will have the more damaging long-term effects on both the Indian polity and its psyche.

On August 5, 2019 the Modi government announced the unilateral and illegal annexation of the disputed territory that India had been occupying through abject violence for 70 years. The government repealed articles 370 and 35A which conferred a “special status” on Jammu & Kashmir, and thus revoked a covenant that earlier Indian regimes had made with the petty vassals of Srinagar who had sold their people for a song. The perfidy of these vassals would do them no good, as Delhi would jail them all, and then jail the entire 8 million-strong population of Kashmir. This open prison of unprecedented scope would then be held down mercilessly by nearly a million troops on the ground.

It has been more than a year since the lockdown was imposed on Kashmir by a foreign occupation force. Now more sinister moves are underway, including demographic and social engineering to make the Kashmiris a minority in their own home. The distress of confinement has driven many to madness, to self-harm, and worse still. This is the nightmare that the fascists in Delhi have let loose, and yet it is but one of two atrocious acts within the span of less than a year. In late March 2020, the Modi government decided to declare a complete shutdown of the country at a notice of just four hours. Speaking at 8pm, he warned the nation that the whole country would be closed after midnight for a span of 21 days in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Who in their right mind would ask one billion people to make arrangements for three weeks at the whim of a late-night notice four hours before lockdown? Yet “every state, every district, every lane, every village will be under lockdown,” Mr. Modi said on television. The Indian public was worked into a pandemonium, not knowing how to grapple with such an abrupt declaration. Many rural migrants decided they could not live in the cities because they would simply starve. They could not count on civil society or the help of others to survive, and so millions of people began long and arduous treks back to their ancestral villages. Some commented that this was the largest migration on foot since 1947.

Many people who took flight in this hurried manner were carriers of the coronavirus, and so they spread the pathogen along the large groups that travelled far across the rural landscape, where public health facilities are either extremely poor or altogether non-existent. As New York Times reporters Gettleman and Schultz warned, “long lines of migrant workers streamed out of recently closed railway stations, with thousands of men, almost none wearing masks, marching close together to far-off villages, potentially spreading the virus deep into the countryside.” The untold misery of trudging the long-haul back home led many to fall sick, go hungry, and even die. As P. Chidambaram regrets, “we will never know how many people died of starvation, because no state government will admit to starvation deaths.”

The mass exodus imposed by Modi’s lockdown is in fact the single biggest reason why India and Pakistan have such different coronavirus outcomes. In Pakistan, smart lockdowns and tight mobility restrictions kept the virus confined to urban centres, where the poor were also assisted by a significant civil society effort. Rural transmission would have been devastating in Pakistan as well, but it was not allowed to happen. The exodus in India, however, meant that coronavirus had spread to sufficiently large pools of individuals through community transmission that its effects would then be multiplicative, and this is what is now wreaking havoc in India’s cities because those migrants have since returned in droves.

India now has the second highest number of cases and third highest number of deaths in the world, with no signs that the pandemic’s horrific toll will subside. This is the result of the second lockdown that Modi has imposed in the last two years, a measure that was both hurried and unsparing. Not only has it had devastating public health consequences, but it has also generated an economic catastrophe: the second-quarter 2020 GDP for India was a colossal -23 percent lower than a year earlier. Economic paralysis and social dysfunction are in fact endemic to both lockdowns imposed by Modi, for even in Kashmir there is no semblance left of a functioning society.

Although both lockdowns continue to create immense distress for the subject populations, the question persists regarding which of these lockdowns will ultimately exact the heavier toll on the Indian polity and its psyche. As the coronavirus outbreak continues to rampage through Indian states, and while the people of Kashmir continue to stare at the bleakness of their predicament, the tale of two lockdowns has yet to completely unfurl.

-Dr. Usman is a Director at Centre for Aerospace and Security Studies (CASS). This article was first published in The Nation newsaper. He can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »