Series Review: IC814 — whose life is worthier?

I completed the IC814 series in two halves, over three months. My wife walked away, saying, “Why rip the bandages when they aren’t necessary?’

I will skip the review of the movie itself. There are far too many views and reviews. Lax airport security, competing intelligence agencies, terror for one, freedom for another, innocent people who just want to make it through the day, soldiers who think about their families while they live but die for their country without a blink, people who take a flight to get across to their loved ones on time — every one, a human — a life.

The story is straightforward. India and Pakistan are two nations that emerged from a division orchestrated by the British, with Kashmir remaining an unresolved issue. This region is claimed by all three parties: India, Pakistan, and those seeking an independent Kashmir. The conflict has led to wars, as well as numerous assaults and skirmishes between the two states and non-state actors. The incident involving IC-814 highlights the tensions between India and Pakistan, as well as the actions of those who claim to fight for freedom while simultaneously stifling liberty through radicalization, impacting the lives and livelihoods of countless families.

Guns, violence, and death are deeply intertwined with the ideas of nationhood and freedom, as seen through the perspectives of the different parties involved in these conflicts. The cat-and-mouse games played by intelligence agencies in Nepal, the authorities in Delhi, the handlers managing terrorists and hostage-takers, as well as the governments of the UAE, Pakistan, and Afghanistan — all of these actors are part of this grim scenario, with each stakeholder positioned against the others. Two crucial elements emerge in this complex situation: human life and liberty.

When history weighs heavily on the stakeholders, it is difficult to consider human life and liberty. Each side is correct and deserves the right to life and liberty, while simultaneously contesting and abhorring the other side's right to the same. The events in the region and elsewhere were already at play, but mostly behind the curtains or appearing as statistics in newspapers. But a plane hijack sets things up differently — the value of lives just increased for some, at the cost of others.

The terrorists bid for and traded with the Indian Government. The Indian Government traded with the UAE, the US, and the Taliban, the hostages staked their lives with the terrorist detainees in India, the soldiers and spies who staked their lives to detain these terrorists, and the hostage takers staked their lives against the Indian Government and four other nations. Life and liberty were on the table for discussion.

All but one were released and safely returned to India, allowing the nation to breathe a sigh of relief. However, questions persist about how we value our lives and liberties compared to others.

‘Who cares about history, when you can save human lives today?’ — The Foreign Minister of India.

‘We won’t allow both parties to shed blood on our soil, which is unIslamic.’ — The Foreign Minister of the Taliban Government.

‘For you, death is a luxury, Chaaya. For us, it is routine.’ — One of the terrorists/hostage takers to the Air Stewardess.

‘At the end of the day, everybody wants to go home — our home. ’ — One of the terrorists/hostage takers to the Air Stewardess.

‘Here is the 2-year-old child and widowed mother of an Indian Army Soldier. If you are going to release these terrorists, what will you say to the kid?’

‘Tomorrow, nobody will remember that we saved lives. We will be questioned, the Prime Minister will be pointed fingers at, for releasing terrorists. ‘ One of the Indian negotiators to another.

The debates, dialogues, and decisions surrounding this issue revolve around human liberty and life. This incident occurred before 2001 when airport security was merely cursory. It took incidents like IC814 and the 2011 attacks to highlight the vulnerability of flights to hijacking and other threats. The value placed on the life and liberty of airline travelers is among the highest. Vulnerability comes at a cost, and that cost can be devastating — affecting a nation’s pride, the legacy of its leadership, and the future lives of both soldiers and innocent civilians. It also impacts the morale of the armed forces, who sacrifice to defend the borders.

From a traveler’s perspective, the objective is straightforward and unrelated to the nation, liberty, or the soldiers fighting for them. What they seek is a normal life in which their rights to life and liberty are preserved and uninterrupted. This right to freedom and life becomes the central issue in the highly visible negotiations between the government and terrorists. In a way, both soldiers and the government are fighting for the same cause: the lives and liberties of their citizens. Soldiers sacrifice their lives, while governments sometimes concede ground — as seen in the case of IC814. It is easy to judge either side in hindsight, but ultimately, both have paid a price to ensure the safety of the passengers on IC814.

A struggling, young democracy is engaged in a war against highly motivated and radical non-state actors, who receive backing from a neighboring country with a complicated history involving borders and religion. This often leads to an imbalanced conflict. The struggle is not conventional; for example, hijacked flights have played a significant role in this ongoing battle, which is deeply rooted in the historical divisions created by the British in Bengal and Punjab.

The British represented the governing authority, while the Indian natives, including Pakistanis, fought for their lives and freedoms against this authority. Today, the situation in Kashmir offers a different perspective: non-state actors claim to be fighting for freedom in this contested region, while India and Pakistan are the states involved. The emphasis is not on determining who is right, but on understanding how history shapes these events.

For every hijacked flight, there are countless lives lost on the ground — soldiers, terrorists, and civilians. Even as I write this, events are unfolding. The means and motives of each stakeholder in this conflict cannot be altered. However, the tactics — such as hijacking and taking civilians hostage to extract concessions — arise from a state of vulnerability. This vulnerability was evident in the September 11 attacks in 2001, where once opportunities were recognized, they were exploited. The fragility of air travel security represents one such vulnerability.

Consider this: if there were no prize to negotiate for, would such events even occur? The long, inefficient legal processes can prolong the incarceration of terrorists in various prisons, including those in Kashmir. Keeping these individuals alive — especially if they are not sentenced to death — forces the state to bear the cost while remaining vulnerable to hostage situations. If the legal process were expedited, or if there were faster executions of the death penalty for proven terrorists, it could potentially prevent such crises.

However, this is where India’s constitution stands out. Regardless of their backgrounds, every accused person (including terrorists) has the right to legal defense. While the legal process guarantees liberty, it also contributes to the state’s vulnerability.

The life of a free human is the greatest prize that the warring parties are fighting for. In this context, the air traveler becomes the most significant asset in negotiations.

Let’s take a moment to consider the pilot and crew members who were responsible for the safety and comfort of the passengers on the ill-fated flight. Each of them went above and beyond their call of duty while facing the stress, abuse, and threats from the terrorists.

We should also remember the undercover RAW officers, who operate without protection and are engaged in battles against unseen enemies. Likewise, think of the soldiers who are stationed away from their families, tirelessly guarding our borders.

Let’s reflect on those officers who were faced with making the hardest decisions and recognize the leadership that had to take the unenviable choice — much like Hobson’s choice — of releasing terrorists to ensure the safe return of their citizens.

Do Indian citizens truly appreciate the right to life and liberty enshrined in our Constitution? How grateful are we to those who serve us? History may not fully capture the sacrifices and struggles of these individuals, but a televised series can bring their important stories to life. The elements of storytelling — such as plot, characters, narrative quality, cinematography, and editing — contribute to conveying a crucial message: those involved prioritized the lives of the passengers above all else, making significant sacrifices to protect them. This message should resonate with the audience without any controversy.

~Ashok Subramanian © 2024