Court relief to VanDyke reminiscent of Bhopal gas disaster and Purulia arms drop cases where India diluted criminal proceedings under diplomatic pressure
India has again chickened out to American pressure and gone soft on US mercenary Mathew Aaron VanDyke and his six Ukrainian comrades accused of using Indian territory to enter Myanmar to train rebel groups fighting the military junta.
Surrender to ‘Big Bully’
One would have at least expected the US to have worked out a quid-pro-quo deal by going easy on RAW officials and their contacts in the case involving an alleged plot to murder Sikh separatist leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun. But nothing of that sort has happened, and clearly this has ended up again as a surrender to the ‘Big Bully’.
Also read: Matthew VanDyke reveals US-based mastermind behind hiring mercenaries in Myanmar
After nearly six months in custody, VanDyke, an American national, and six Ukrainian co-accused, have now been allowed by the special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court to leave India and return home, albeit only for a month and subject to a string of conditions.
VanDyke, a veteran of covert wars in West Asia, was arrested with the six military-trained Ukrainian partners on March 13 this year. The group belonged to a larger US-based network that smuggled combat drones and military-grade weapons into Myanmar through Indian territory.
How VanDyke escaped UAPA
The Special NIA court’s order was an inevitable sequel to NIA’s rather lenient chargesheet, in which VanDyke and the six Ukrainians were charged under provisions of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, but not for offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, or UAPA, India’s premier anti-terrorism statute. The agency has told the court that its investigation into the alleged UAPA offences was underway.
Since enough visual evidence about VanDyke and his gang training armed rebels on the Indo-Myanmar border was available from their mobile phones and laptops, it was strange they did not invite terrorism charges. Sources close to NIA say this has more to do with the government policy rather than the NIA's prosecution process.
Also read: Russian tip-off led to NIA arrest of American VanDyke and Ukrainian nationals: Report
Incidentally, NIA had initially invoked UAPA, but backed off from pressing charges under the law after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio personally raised VanDyke’s detention issue with New Delhi during his visit to India this year.
The NIA court order was crucial in helping VanDyke and the Ukrainians in securing bail and getting permission to travel abroad.
Retreat after chest-thumping
Strategic Studies expert Brahma Chellaney is right in labelling India as the “perennial soft state”. He rightly observed that the decision to let VanDyke, an American deep state asset, and six Ukrainians leave India quietly was “more than an isolated legal reversal”.
“It belongs to a long and uncomfortable tradition in which New Delhi invokes its tough criminal laws and then retreats when geopolitical pressure builds up,” says Chellaney.
He has a point. From the Congress governments of Indira and Rajiv Gandhi to the current tough-posturing Narendra Modi government, chickening out under pressure after initial chest-thumping triumphalism has been the pattern rather than exception in Indian response.
Familiar pattern
The episode recalls a familiar pattern. From the Bhopal gas disaster and the Purulia arms drop affair to the Enrica Lexie case involving Italian marines and Ottavio Quattrocchi’s escape in the Bofors scandal, India has repeatedly seen high-profile criminal proceedings against foreign nationals or entities diluted, abandoned or rendered inconsequential under diplomatic or strategic pressure.
Also read: Italian marines case: How the UN court order leaves India at sea
“Different cases, different Indian governments, but the same question endures: What makes India such a soft state that it so often fails to enforce accountability when powerful foreign interests are involved?" Chellaney asks.
Purulia arms drop case
This writer is a personal witness to this national trend – one of failure to withstand pressure from abroad. Having covered the 1995 Purulia arms drop case as a BBC correspondent, I can recall the air of despondency and self-inflicted defeat in the CBI Kolkata office after the Atal Vajpayee government let off British arms smuggler Peter Bleach with a presidential pardon after being slapped a life sentence for dropping a huge consignment of weapons at Purulia in West Bengal.
Also read: Bofors collapsed under the weight of weak evidence, and lost time
The CBI officers had worked hard to present a watertight case by garnering evidence from five to six countries, but all in vain. The Purulia mastermind Kim Davy (real name: Niels Holck) could not be brought to India to face his prison sentence because his country, Denmark, would not play ball.
(The Federal seeks to present views and opinions from all sides of the spectrum. The information, ideas or opinions in the articles are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Federal)
