THE DICHOTOMY OF POLITICAL ALOOFNESS BY INDARMY

AND UPHOLDING THE TENTH COMMANDMENT

 

“For the political class it is a truism that in pre-election scenario the voter is their God, and post-election victory they fear no God. But let it not be said of the military leadership that they fear their political masters more than they fear God.” – Veteran Col RS Sidhu

The Tenth Commandment

“Only fear God, Uphold Dharma (Ethical mode of life-the path of righteousness) and enjoy serving the country.”

https://indianarmy.nic.in/Site/FormTemplete/frmTemp1PTC2C.aspx?MnId=o9J7q2qhhWWGEWbZQrC6qQ==&ParentID=BcOo+vJcRZVJdsm+0I/JtQ==

Yes, the Tenth Commandment is part of the ‘TEN COMMANDMENTS’ formulated by the first CDS in context of Military’s conduct in counter-insurgency operations, but it also most crisply defines the fighting ethos of the Indarmy!

Backdrop

The armed forces of a nation are the last line of defence of its citizenry when faced with external adversity and at times even during internal strife, hence hold a special status within the State. It is an unwritten covenant between the State and its military, wherein the latter are answerable to higher standards of professional competence, ethics and moral canons than those prevailing in parallel hierarchies, required to voluntarily forego personal freedoms and liberty enjoyed as a legal right by rest of the citizenry, and unhesitatingly be prepared to give the supreme sacrifice when required. In return, the State is obligated to enter them in the battlefield with the best that the nation can afford, ensure an environment which produces the highest standards of military leadership so critical to winning the war, accord it special respect and dignity, and protect the soldiers and their immediate family’s needs and interest, so that the military can focus its full energy to defend the nation from its enemies.

In a democracy the code of political supremacy is an unquestioned tenet. Hence, it establishes a special and direct relationship between the political and military leadership, unfettered by any intermediary hierarchy. Unfortunately, post-independence, the Indian state represented by the political leadership was unable to fulfil its part of the bargain with their own military, and this unwritten but sacrosanct consensus was shattered. As negligible national political leadership had prior military service record and even lesser had battlefield experience, unlike in most western democracies, it had more to do with ignorance than willful spite. The politically expedient propagation of independence being achieved through principles of non-violence too played its role. It led to the military hierarchy being kept out of the governance structure and introducing a Ministry of Defence bureaucratic interface between the political and its military leadership. There cannot be a greater tribute to the professionalism of the Indarmy that it has consistently delivered despite the shattered covenant.

The Context

“While an organisation or an individual may opt to stay aloof from politics, unfortunately the acts of omission and commission by political leadership shall and will interfere with the organisation and impact individuals and society at large…”

Indian military is in the throes of its biggest changes. It has been granted the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), a long outstanding need. The creation of Department of Military Affairs (DMA) has brought back the Indarmy from seventy years plus of exile, post-independence, into the Government fold. It was a pleasant surprise as this requirement was never seriously projected by the military. The process for reforming the higher defence architecture of the nation has been set into motion by tasking the CDS for its time bound projection for seeking Government approval for changeover to Theatre Commands. Tour of Duty (TOD) reforms have more or less been finalised for implementation. Very like the Theatre Commands at the highest level, the TOD reforms shall forever impact the very roots of the Indarmy ethos. An ongoing comprehensive military cadre review, involving lateral transfer of Officers and Personnel Below Officer Ranks (PBOR) into parallel hierarchies and possibly even corporate sector, is also in the offing, which will have long term impact on the governance structure of the country and its civil society at large. It is but natural, that such far reaching and fast paced reforms in the military invite alarm and apprehension from a large segment of the strategic fraternity. Yet, a large part of the armed services fraternity looks forward to these changes with excitement at the future possibilities in professional competence in battlefields of the future.

These big ticket military reforms should also be viewed in context of major reforms underway in the country’s structure of governance. The higher bureaucracy is more and more being made accountable for its actions, and parallel induction of domain experts at middle rung are providing it with requisite modern governance expertise. But what is of biggest import is the induction of domain experts into the political leadership governing the country. The impact being made by the erstwhile bureaucrats, technocrats, and military leaders turned Ministers in Central Government is increasingly being viewed favourably. The policy to make India self-reliant in meeting its defence needs has also been introduced none too soon.

Another clear trend that emerges from the reformist actions of the current political hierarchy is the steady distancing from the erstwhile colonial and foreign rule legacy. Rehabilitation of the legacy of Subhash Chandra Bose in the very heart of Lutyens’s Delhi, and the Central Vista project, which shall change the Capital’s colonial era skyline forever, are the visible physical demonstrators of this observation.

Indarmy leadership has had ample time and experience to fathom the new political vision. Subtle changes in the Republic Day format, the replacement of colonial era martial music with contemporary Indian tunes and instruments during the Beating The Retreat ceremony, the political call to Indarmy leadership to selectively distance itself from colonial traditions, and most importantly, the government encouraged celebrations of Indian Naval Mutinies of 1946 and the rehabilitation of ‘mutinous’ Subhash Chandra Bose led Indian National Army, were clear harbingers of the new course charted for the Indarmy. All this could not have gone unnoticed either by the military hierarchy or even the vocal veteran fraternity.

An Idealist Review of Indian Politico Military Interface

The fact that the military reforms are being pursued by a democratically elected Government, with a nationalist agenda, is undeniable. Hence it may be inferred that such a political leadership would not willingly weaken its own military, and would be amenable to military viewpoint if taken up with strong conviction and facts. 

It would also be rationale to assume, unless evidence emerges to the contrary, that the professional competence of the Indarmy leadership is beyond reproach, and that it is steeply immersed in the ethos of ‘Tenth Commandment’, in letter as well as spirit.   

It is a fact that the Indarmy leadership has had adequate time for in-house discussions to acquiesce or constructively oppose these reforms.

Keeping in view the far reaching impact of these reforms, it would be understandable and reasonable that there would be internal dissenting notes at various levels. Interestingly, no strong dissent has as yet surfaced, as indicated by lack of resignations. So it would be prudent to infer that the apex military leadership, in its considered military opinion, is convinced of the viability of these reforms.

A Realist Appraisal of the Contrarian Point of View

However, there is a discernible disquiet amidst a large section of the strategic veteran community that these reforms are likely to destroy the very fibre which has enabled the Indarmy to prevail over the adversaries of the nation, despite being inadequately equipped. This analysis is in conflict with the professed views of the current Indarmy leadership, and ipso facto, challenges the latter’s professionalism and at an extreme even points finger at being found wanting to live up to the letter and spirit of the ‘Tenth Commandment’.

Looked at from a historical perspective, the last time similar politically induced far reaching and equally fast paced military reforms were carried out, in any major army, was almost a century prior. The German army in the 1930s, during pre-WW II period, underwent rapid and far reaching reforms. The then Germany, under sway of a right wing nationalist political leadership, was able to browbeat its professional military leadership into undertaking military reforms that ultimately led to the rise of a parallel force, the SS. This force rose to being better equipped and possessed greater combat potential than the regular army units and formations.  

Viewed from the prism of the above historical perspective it is but natural, that the ongoing upskilling of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) in India, while downsizing the regular Indarmy, is viewed with apprehension. The current sanctioned strength of the Indian military of under 1.4 million is being downsized in periodic reviews, while the strength of the CAPF with an already existing cadre of close to one million, is being frequently enhanced. While the CAPF cadre is being showered with Government largesse in terms of enhanced pay and perks and even NFU, the same is being denied to Armed Forces, with even action on report of Justice L Narsimha Reddy One Man Judicial Commission (OMJC) on the Seventh Pay Commission anomalies for armed forces still pending with the Government for more than five years. It does indicate to the Government promoting the CAPF interests while overlooking the military.

On the professional competence of the Indarmy leadership, there should be no two views. Their professional competence would be at par with those of the yesteryears soldiers, if not more. Plus they do have the advantage of more current professional grasp over the future battlefield requirements as also are privy to inputs not available to the strategic veteran fraternity. Thus, if the views were to be weighed solely on the scales of military competence, then the current military leadership views would hold greater and decisive weightage.  

However, it is the implied failing of the Indarmy leadership on its upholding the letter and spirit of ‘Tenth Commandment’ which should be disturbing. It is well known that there exists an unstated ‘line of succession’ for the service chiefs, which probably is as jealously guarded by the MoD bureaucracy, as the line of succession of the highest judiciary of India. That there have been few Services Chiefs who have failed the scrutiny of the ‘Tenth Commandment’, is in public domain. Hence, the issue should not be brushed aside lightly.

Cross Fertilisation of the Political and Military Domain

The bare facts that emerge are that the issue is highly emotive within the strategic veteran fraternity. The reforms have been under review by the military hierarchy over a prolonged period and there is no discernible open dissent to the restructuring proposals within the serving Indarmy leadership. Duly elected Government of the day is pursuing the implementation of these reforms. Even if it is accepted that the current Indarmy leadership has collectively failed the test of the ‘Tenth Commandment’, there is no redress to this malaise other than an external stimulus imparted through the political domain. That leaves those favouring the contrarian point of view with pursuing their zeal by taking recourse to the political arena, which during their days in service was taboo.

But when distancing the Indarmy from its colonial and foreign rule legacy is the flavour of the day, this colonial era ethos of military being aloof from the political arena too needs to be given an equally quiet burial. The unwritten covenant between the state and its military is non-existent, and the political leadership has as a right strayed into the military domain. It is but natural that the military veterans overcome their abhorrence of all things political and come out of the self-imposed restriction, and foray into the domain of politics to assert their deep held convictions.

The leading and omnipresent question in the Services Selection Board interviews has always been to know the reason for the candidate wanting to join the Indarmy, and the overwhelming response has been “to serve the country”. Well the political class too proclaims to serve the nation, and the political opinion is privileged to overrule the military point of view! Military veterans in the other democracies have risen to occupy the highest chair in the government of their respective countries. India too should be no different.

So do you have it in you?!!!

In the military battlefields the soldiers hands are awash with the blood of his enemy as it is a terminal issue of kill or be killed. In the political battles, and let there be no doubt that they are battles though on a different plane and with different weapons, the contenders hands are immersed in political muck, and all for the ‘cause of the nation?!!’ In the political fray, no matter how well meaning the intentions, the contenders perforce take recourse to undesirable methodologies to be one up on the adversary in the battle for wooing the voters for gaining victory. The critical issue here is that only a politician holding power can implement his vision.

Looking at the issue holistically, cross fertilisation of the political and military domain in India is an idea whose time has come, and it’s in the best interests of the country as well. Political sphere is seeded with nationalist ethos, strategic vision and organisational capabilities of the military mind, whereas the Indarmy leadership is held accountable to the letter and spirit of the ‘Tenth Commandment’ under specialist overwatch.