During the Security Conclave held at Delhi Gymkhana Club on 3rd September, a senior military veteran asked the Chairman National Security Advisory Board that if as per him, military is a part of government, why it is not a part of governance especially when we are staring at anarchy in the country? The latter’s response was nothing but evasive – as evasive as the Defence Minister’s recent statement in Parliament in response to the Chinese incursions in Ladakh. Not that the Defence Minister’s statement that “India had not ceded an inch of territory to China” can be classified semantically wrong because the loss is hardly in inches and should you convert 645 square kilometers to inches, even the Chinese will get nonplussed. Not that it is the first time the Indian public is being deceived about intrusions.
…has the military been subdued to such an extent that even the forward commander is looking over his shoulder for a ‘yes’; are the hands of the military tied by the political authority…
The Government perhaps blindly follows what John F Kennedy said albeit in different context, “No matter how big the lie; repeat it often enough and the masses will regard it as the truth”. However, the fact is that no matter what political obfuscations, the ground situation can hardly be hidden and sensitive reports and documents will keep getting leaked by those whose patriotic fervor cannot be sabotaged by all the weaponry that some of the policy makers working in tandem with the mafia have at their disposal. Witness the government obduracy in refusing to de-induct ITBP from areas like Depsang and Chumar, or putting them under command the army ignoring the brutal lessons of 1959 massacre of CRPF personnel by Chinese in Ladakh though in the instant case why should the PLA indulge in bloodshed when orders are to engage in reverse gear and redraw the LAC wherever the Chinese eventually decide to halt and establish camp?
What should seriously concern the military, however, are questions that our civilian brethren are asking repeatedly through, blogs, write ups, discussions and e-mails: in this whole game of Chinese Checkers, why is the military a mute spectator; why are commanders at all levels, particularly the Generals, not taking actions on ground on their own even if the ITBP is deliberately not being put under command the military; has the military been subdued to such an extent that even the forward commander is looking over his shoulder for a ‘yes’; are the hands of the military tied by the political authority or is the military itself responsible for killing the initiative of their junior leaders; are the Service Chiefs so very concerned about their post retirement options that they have lost their voice and don’t thump the table even when the military stands belittled advertently or inadvertently; why has there not been any statement by the Army Chief with all the incursions and intrusions by the PLA; is it enough for the Army Chief to say Ham ne choorian nahin pahni hain (we are not wearing bangles) while the world wonders how 25-30 Chinese can intrude 30 kilometers and belittle a 1.1 million army; how can the PLA ‘prevent’ or ‘not allow’ Indians to patrol up to the LAC – have they fenced off the line or do they form a human chain to block the movement of Indian patrols across the otherwise open terrain in Ladakh; what has gone wrong in military with Service Chiefs indulging in Adarsh type of scams, names figuring in defence scams yet moving around without any qualms; when the politico-military connect is missing altogether, what measures are being instituted to establish this in backdrop of political disdain and bureaucratic stonewalling?
Ironically in India, the military appears to have deliberately avoided this Constitutional responsibility…Postal ballots did not work most of the times, time delay and loss in transit being main contributory factors.
It is for the military to take note of these observations circulating in the public domain. A more focused comment was the perception generated by the Defence Minister following the killing of five of our soldiers that he would make a statement in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha following the Army Chief giving him the facts though the Defence Minister’s statement was days after the incident and as if MoD did not have all the facts. In one stroke he finished the chain of command, the stature of Chief as if he was a patrol master, and the media showed him up as the chief mourner in the footage that followed. In an article by M D Nalapat, the author wrote of the Army Chief doing exactly what the Prime Minister tells him to do. There was also this article titled ‘Wanted! Service Chiefs with Balls’ authored by Shailesh Ranade. Many intellectuals, scholars and cross sections in public are wondering if the military leadership is willing to gird up its loins and shed its pusillanimity now after these repeated humiliations.
In a democracy like India, it is essential for every citizen to participate in the democratic process, by exercising his or her Constitutional obligation to vote. Not casting one’s vote amounts to disrespecting the very spirit of democracy and disregarding one’s responsibilities towards nation building. Ironically in India, the military appears to have deliberately avoided this Constitutional responsibility. Not that the military did not have problems in doing so. Military deployments are widespread including in difficult areas, some with poor communications. Postal ballots did not work most of the times, time delay and loss in transit being main contributory factors. Proxy voting too did not prove a viable option because of service conditions and factors like no relatives remaining in native place, no guarantee whether the person empowered with the proxy votes for the person the soldier wanted etc. All these options were deliberated upon by the Election Commission in conjunction with the military over the years to arrive at a workable solution.
What many do not know is that in recent years the Election Commission of India has authorized every soldier who is serving for six months or more on the day of election in any part of India to vote in the State elections (of the State he is serving in) as well as the Municipal Elections of the Municipality covering the place of the soldier’s current posting. This has also been exercised with good results but only sporadically. In 2007, when the UP State elections were announced, the army garrisons at Mathura, Allahabad, Kanpur notified the civil authorities that all ranks posted at these garrisons fulfilling the six month criteria will be participating in the State elections. The list of eligible all ranks were forwarded to civil authorities. It is obvious that given the elaborate processes and time required to provide voter identity cards, it is not possible to provide military personnel with new voter identity cards at every new place of posting and neither is this stipulated by the Election Commission in authorizing military personal to vote at the place of posting. So what the UP Government did was that they established separate voting booths for army personal where individuals were permitted to vote in accordance with the list provided by army, after showing their service identity cards. The voting was highly successful and in a healthy atmosphere though the then Army Chief (later Governor) was reportedly not happy about it for fear of upsetting the polity.
Comprehensive national security encompasses not only military security but also, political security, economic security, energy security, food security, health security, personal security, community security, environment security.
National Security is often related to only military security, which is misnomer. Comprehensive national security encompasses not only military security but also, political security, economic security, energy security, food security, health security, personal security, community security, environment security. All of these are inter-related. For example, it is questionable whether we can have adequate military security without an 8 to 10 percent economic growth. The underlying fact also is that military security is the mainstay of national security and unless a nation has robust military security, economic security cannot be achieved to desired level. Without robust military security, all and sundry neighbours lie in wait to take undue advantage, as appears happening to us presently.
In any democracy, civilian supremacy over the military is must that essentially implies political (not bureaucratic) control even in a powerful country like the United States. Without political control and involvement over the military, the democracy becomes a farce, as we are witnessing in Pakistan. However, it is pertinent to note that for comprehensive national security with military security as its nucleus, a strong politico-military connect is vital. This has been a weakness in India as a result of which we have negatives like not having been able to even define a National Security Strategy 66 years after independence and develop comprehensive national power in focused manner and take similar other vital steps, all detrimental to India’s accelerated growth and securing its rightful place in the comity of nations. Participation of the military in the democratic process and fulfilling of the Constitutional obligation by every soldier, sailor and airman in casting his / her vote would contribute in a major way in bringing the polity and the military closer. With the standing army strength of 1.2 million, 60,000 strong navy and 1,25,000 strong air-force, participation in strengthening the democratic process would help establish the politico-military connect pan India and in turn help develop our comprehensive national power. Actually, both the polity and the military need to vigorously promote this.
Not letting individual military personnel cast their votes as authorized by the Election Commission of India actually amounts to disrespect to the Constitution and denying the democratic rights of the soldier and willful disregard of his / her democratic rights. Participation of the military in elections may not be encouraged by a cross section of the polity but the Service Chiefs need to enforce it for aforesaid reasons. There is no doubt that given the state of subjugation that the military has been subjected to systematically, some Service Chiefs may be wary that this may lead to the military being labeled ‘political’ but then how does casting votes by the military earn the label of ‘political’ when this is authorized by both the Constitution and Election Commission of India? In fact inaction, possibly on behest of political masters unsure which way the voting would go, amounts to ‘politicizing’ the military through default.
In fact inaction, possibly on behest of political masters unsure which way the voting would go, amounts to ‘politicizing’ the military through default.
A report in the Indian Express dated 29 January 2013 titled ‘Voting right for soldiers: Army formations give positive response to NGO’s appeal’ talked of the Army Ordnance Corps having asked serving soldiers to register for postal ballots and that some 145 forms had been dispatched to various electoral authorities. Postal ballot is the best way to scuttle the soldier’s votes and has already proved a defunct concept in the military. Besides today is the era of bogus voter lists (16 lakhs found only in Delhi as per one sample survey) and defective Electronic Voting Machines, appeal for rectification of which has been left pending with law authorities for obvious reasons. There have been sporadic questions on the issue of voting by soldiers like in rediff.com on 15 April 2013 titled ‘Why the soldier is denied his right to vote’? But the question is that when this is already authorized and undertaken successfully in 2007 UP Elections, why are we trying to reinvent the wheel? Area Headquarters, Sub Area Headquarters and Station Headquarters need to get cracking; inform the administration, forward electoral lists and liaise with civil authorities.
So, will the Service Chiefs continue to ‘politicize’ the Military by NOT letting soldiers vote in order to secure their own Governorships and Ambassadorships or will the Service Chiefs act and announce that the military WILL henceforth participate in elections, commencing forthcoming General Elections? Will the media question them if they have it in them or not, and if not, why not? Will military commanders at all levels across India exercise initiative to act on what is authorized to their command by the Constitution and Election Commission of India or keep looking over their shoulder for the ghost of a ‘yes’? Need of the country for you to act on Constitutional rights of your soldiers in joining the democratic process was never more.
Please wait...
first we should educate our public, who just give a thumb impression consent to a picture, for just a few rupees………… if every educated Indian, (including the elderly who are not v. mobile ) can impart basic education… we will have so many more educated people….. if we avoid using just a few Chinese ( foreign ) goods, … if we refuse to accept n give bribes, we certainly can do wonders… we have lost our self respect n our patriotism………pl. start programs which educate people at grass root.
It’s pretty apparent that any military commander would find it underwhelming not to use force, while the civilian leadership would find it overwhelming. The rationale for an initial military action is also a civilian consideration, and the supplies to the military are civilian entirely, in the initial level. It isn’t military considerations that make a military intervention. The issue with the Chinese military is that their military is seen to be pro-active, and their population has a history of endorsing military action, after the second world war. The politico-social relation in China, has a situation where in the past, the Communist regime was the institution that formed the sentiment behind any policy formulation. Every person who could be a leader, was a leader in the Communist Party, and this included important military, academic, bureaucratic and even sports personalities(I assume). The people believed, that the party position was an enlightened and informed one. Today, the issue is that the business interests among the Chinese have various U. S. and E. U. interests, and the Communist Party is represented by these interests. Apparently, people in the Communist Party are also high ranking business officials. The west has this perception, perhaps. The Chinese leadership must address the fear, in general, that the people in China will see the similarity of the overseas interest being addressed by Chinese domestic function, and the Chinese people while not being a typical capitalist or communist system, they are what make the engine of Chinese industry.
Does the Army have any Mandate for the protection of India’s borders and rules of engagement? One wonders.
The PMO fails to intervene delibrately to put the ITBP under command the army in areas of Depsang and Chumar. Perhaps land is being sold out on purpose !
General, I don’t think “perhaps” is appropriate. It is because the Government will cede land and create “facts” on the ground and then trot out the old excuses (i) a relic of history (ii) not a blade of grass grows there (iii) it is better to have uninterrupted and uninterruptable talks (a la Mani Shankar Aiyar) (iv) we must have talks about talks (as with Pakistan). Since Independence we have had political leaders with a huge yellow strip running across their backs. The widest stripe is in this Government.