Imagine a world where the person responsible for India's national security doesn't use a mobile phone or the internet for most of his work. Sounds unbelievable, right? That's the reality for Ajit Doval, India's National Security Advisor (NSA). He revealed this surprising fact himself at the Viksit Bharat Young Leaders Dialogue 2026, leaving many wondering how he manages such a crucial role in today's hyper-connected world. But here's where it gets interesting...
During a question-and-answer session, Doval confirmed that he indeed avoids using the internet and mobile phones in his daily work. He explained that he only uses a phone for family matters or to communicate with individuals in other countries when absolutely necessary. He emphasized that he utilizes alternative communication methods, some of which are kept confidential. This raises a crucial question: In an age dominated by digital communication, how does someone in such a high-profile position effectively manage national security without relying on these tools?
To understand Doval's unconventional approach, it's essential to know his background. Ajit Doval is not just any NSA; he's a retired Indian Police Service (IPS) officer from the Kerala cadre, a seasoned veteran with decades of experience in intelligence, internal security, and counter-terrorism. He is the fifth person to hold the position of National Security Advisor in India.
Born in Uttarakhand in 1945, Doval's career is nothing short of extraordinary. He joined the IPS in 1968 and quickly rose through the ranks, becoming the youngest police officer to ever receive the Kirti Chakra, a prestigious award for bravery. Throughout his career, he tackled insurgency operations in Mizoram, Punjab, and the Northeast, gaining invaluable experience in handling complex security challenges. This hands-on experience likely shaped his views on communication and information security.
Doval's influence extends to several major national security decisions. He played a pivotal role in the 2016 surgical strikes following the Uri terror attack and the 2019 Balakot airstrikes after the Pulwama attack. He was also actively involved in managing the Doklam standoff with China and shaping India's overall approach to internal security. And this is the part most people miss: his deep understanding of ground realities and human intelligence networks likely allows him to operate effectively even without constant digital connectivity.
His involvement in the 1999 IC-814 hijacking crisis in Kandahar further highlights his expertise in crisis management. In fact, between 1971 and 1999, he handled numerous aircraft hijacking cases, demonstrating his cool-headedness and strategic thinking under immense pressure. Adding to his mystique, he also spent several years working undercover in Pakistan, gathering crucial intelligence for India. This experience likely instilled in him a deep awareness of the vulnerabilities associated with digital communication.
It's worth noting that Doval's name has also been misused in the digital realm. Last year, the government's fact-checking agency had to debunk a fake Facebook post falsely attributed to him, warning of an impending cyberattack from Pakistan. The Press Information Bureau (PIB) clarified that Ajit Doval does not have an official Facebook account and that the post was completely fabricated. This incident underscores the very real risks of misinformation and impersonation that Doval likely seeks to avoid by limiting his digital footprint.
But here's where it gets controversial... Some might argue that in today's world, avoiding digital communication is a handicap for someone in Doval's position. They might contend that he's missing out on crucial real-time information and collaborative opportunities. On the other hand, others might applaud his approach, arguing that it prioritizes security and prevents him from being easily tracked or targeted by adversaries. What do you think? Is Doval's decision a strategic masterstroke or a self-imposed limitation? How much does this kind of approach rely on the strength of his team and the systems they create? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!
