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.”
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.
Comments
Post a Comment