Indian Defence Review

“Defeat is not the worst of failures. Not to have tried is the true failure” – George Edward Woodberry

Rejoice my friends – my countrymen, we have collectively achieved the impossible; something that other nations would have spent a fortune and invaluable time and effort to unearth what simmers below the surface.

Despite Mr. Modi’s success in unlocking the decades’ long logjam, the fact is that that by demanding ‘uniform pay for the same rank’ (other things being equal), the uniformed fraternity has been led up a garden path. When they should have been demanding ‘parity’ with their civilian counterparts, including Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) – an (irrational) allowance promoting inefficiency but maintaining ‘pay parity,’ they have only been asking for equality amongst themselves – a colonel’s pay/pension against a latest retired colonel and so on. Issues of uniform grade pays etc., which are the barometer of inter-service seniority, have been conveniently left out of the narrative. Having said that, even after the momentous OROP decision, the government’s sincerity is questionable as red herrings like VRS and appointment of a Judicial Committee has muddied the waters. These need to be seen as clever ploys detracting from the main OROP issue: after all, how can pensions adjusted every five or even two years qualify as ‘One Rank–One Pay,’ this would translate as One Rank – Five/Two Pays. This that remains the nub of the question and goes against the grain of the well-meaning Koshyari Commission’s definition of OROP. Surely, in this age of smart computing, yearly increments can be done without human intervention – if we can’t manage even this level of computing, the Prime Minister’s plank of development through technology would sound hollow.

That having been said, the aim is not to discuss OROP perse, but to cull lessons and learn from this painful episode in our recent Indian history. No amount of Fact Finding Committees, Inquiries etc. could have exposed the black-hole of India’s (dysfunctional) civil-military relations; something that is serious and something for the government to address. If as a Nation, we choose to learn from this, we can evolve a better India, an India with (civilised) Civil-Military relations. However, if we refuse to learn, it would be fair to surmise that India needs no external enemies – she has enough internally. It may suffice to reiterate some fundamentals that have been lost sight of in this ‘high profile,’ emotional, but totally unnecessary campaign, there are some home truths that both sides must realise, and where possible, correct.

Military Leadership Traits versus Political-Civil Leadership

The military is advised to remain apolitical, something that is not only desirable in any democracy, but something that remains admirable even after decades of deteriorating civil-military relations in post independent India – this is a value that ‘cannot’ and ‘should not’ be allowed to be compromised.

The first thing a young boy/girl joining the military is told that he/she is a Gentleman/ Lady first before he/she is an officer – a rank. In fact, the rank suffixed to the name and service number on joining the academies is of a Gentleman/Lady Cadet. This practice continues and is ingrained in the military leadership.

Unlike this practice followed in military institutions, there is no such training that emphasises ‘Values’ and ‘Ethics’ in Civil Training Institutes like the IAS Academy, and the like. On the other hand, since the operating environment after their training is expected to be complex (read corrupt), the trainees, develop their own set of values and ethics – the result of their upbringing, experiences and knowledge, in order to ‘adjust’ and later ‘manage’ the real world. Those who don’t fit in become outcasts.

The third actor in the Civil-Military equation is the political leader, someone who parachutes directly into administration and gets placed at the highest level. He/she requires no training, qualifications or even codes and values – they come as they have been trained – most being street fighters and therefore savvy in wheeling-dealing –they are the true arbitrators and it is their absolute power wielded at the ground level that corrupts the maximum.

Be that as it may, is there a thing or two that can be learnt from the military system to improve on the quality of the civil and even political leadership? Can values and ethics somehow be incorporated into the civil administration and polity?

Indifferences of the General Public

The fact that despite the emotive crusade staged at Jantar Mantar and other parts of the country, there has been no real support from the general public. In fact, the people were bemused by seemingly well-off officer fraternity who are seen to be leading the agitation, pleading the case for a few hundred more. On the other hand, the uniformed lot, especially the officers, have not done any ground work towards building up their case in the general public and herein lies a lesson by itself.

Let’s try to explain what the officer lot is fighting for. The military leader is taught early in life that his mission is to strive for the welfare of his men before seeking his own comfort. This is enshrined in the Chetwoode Motto of placing the ‘Nation’ and ‘Your Men’ first. Therefore, the present crusade is not for the officers – it’s primarily for seeking justice the men – men who join in the prime of their youth (pre twenties) and are forced to retire at an average age of 35 or so. To illustrate the case: a sepoy who retired before 1996 gets 82 percent less pension than a sepoy who retired after 2006. Is this justice?[i] That’s what the OROP is about.

It is a fight for these lakhs of men who have offered their services when the nation wanted them to fight or stand vigil in unhospitable weather and terrain conditions. It is these men who between 35 to 37 years of life find themselves with no technical or social skill for a second innings for life out of uniform. Most land up as Security guards outside plush homes or malls, some plying rickshaws – the fight is for them. At the same time, it’s pertinent to interject that their counter-parts in the armed police forces serve till the age of sixty and now through the good offices of the court, are entitled to NFU. Thus, there is no real comparison. OROP is a corrective measure to compensate for the disadvantage of retiring earlier – nothing more, nothing else.

The officer lot seeks dignity, more than money, though it cannot be denied that also counts as they too are compulsorily retired much before their civil counter-parts. The average officer simply asks why he/she should be denied something like the NFU of his civil counter-parts, as when he joined, he/she was placed senior in protocol and hence started with a higher grade pay than them. He also questions the injustice of granting OROP through the backdoor through the craftily worded ‘Apex Scale’ to his Generals/Admirals and Marshalls. In the run-up of the OROP campaign, they stand exposed of accepting ‘official’ gratification for keeping the lid on similar demands from their juniors.

He/she also questions why is it that the corresponding rise in civil services many times faster? Why is it that he remains and gets the pay of a Colonel at twenty years of service, when his counterpart is already getting the grade of a Major General? Why is it that only the Civil Services are allowed to absorb pay hikes by promoting Additional Officers (in some cases over hundred percent), when despite clearing all promotion boards, he is made to retire in the military as there is no vacancy?

Admittedly, there are differences in the model and in the organisational requirements, but rather than narrowing the differences, the trend is on widening them, and it is this that irks the serviceman and rubs off on his family.

Widening Chasm between the Civil and the Uniformed Fraternity

The British kept the military insulated from the pulls and pressures of civil life since they wanted a loyal force to enforce their writ on their colony – this was the genesis of the morbid fear of the Pre-independence Indian leadership, something that they could not shake off, even on gaining freedom from foreign oppression.

At the same time, the military, especially the upper rungs of the military class, bred and nurtured in a ‘Bada Sahib’ culture, continued to keep the military politically and socially inured. The Officer Mess culture where discussions on politics and money were taboo, continued, but were not in line with the changes sweeping the nation. Having been born and groomed by these values, it is difficult to say if they were right or wrong, however, as a third generation military man, it certainly kept me distant from the realities of life – something that the military take great pride as it distinguishes them as a ‘class apart.’ Though debatable, there are lessons in this that need to be addressed internally.

On their part, the post-independence political leadership under Pundit Nehru, vowed that never again would the military be allowed to be ‘all-powerful.’ Mr. Nehru even wanted to do away with the military, something that circumstances (Pakistan and China), more than the intent did not allow. Having said that, the underlying fear prevailed, and despite the manifold increase in size of the military, there was progressive chipping away of their status and since the leadership, including the military, facilitated the outrages – inter-service seniority and protocol tipped in the favour of their civilian counter-parts dramatically.

This did not stop with only creating a civil-military divide; it was even encouraged between the uniformed services by obscure shenanigans in the MoD, playing off the Army versus the Air Force, the Air Force versus the Navy and the Navy versus the others and so on. It was this pervading ‘disunity’ that has manifested as lack of ‘jointness’ amongst the services; the same jointness that the Army and the Air Force was proud of – something that had stood them in good stead in the Kashmir War of 1947-48. Any objective study of inter-service jointness would reveal that it has been a downhill slide thereafter, with the possible exception of the 1971 war – a war that had three NDA course mates at the helm. Rather than blaming this on the bureaucracy, the services need to find common ground within.

Gagging of the Media

Paradoxical as it may sound, there was a deafening silence from the media about the OROP, especially in the initial stages of the campaign. Even when there were discussions on the media, the lack of understanding on the subject by leading anchors and their guests on national Television was baffling; worse were the qualities of statements from some military (sic) experts. However, more worrisome was/is the fact that not only was it evident that the media was extremely one sided – leading anchors, including progenies of distinguished veterans questioned the rationale of an ‘internal’ pension parity and justifying ‘how’ and ‘how much’ it will be a drain on the national exchequer. Even the Honourable Raksha Mantri implied that the burden of the military was excessive as there has been no war for decades – the very fact that the nation has a united military perhaps has been the biggest reason why there has been no war, though casualties of servicemen combating terrorists and natural calamities have become an everyday occurrence.

It may not be out of place to record that war casualties of the 1965 and 1971 wars, who were maimed and/ or hospitalised were placed on ‘half pay’ by the same ‘babus’ who had been kept safe from the horrors of war by the valour of the same men. Such has been the apathy of the bureaucracy and because of them – the political masters of the day. Even young Indians would recall the ‘coffin gate’ scam and this was attributable to the same political party that leads the nation today.

Not once was any explanation sought from the bureaucrats of how the situation was allowed to have come about? On the other hand, party spokesmen only foul mouthed the other party and how only they have the best interests of Ex Servicemen (political constituency) in their hearts – that is understandable as after all, it’s a game of TRP and for currying (political) favours. If objective reporting suffers – so be it.

Having said that, not only is this trend against the fabric of democracy, it is an affront on the intelligence of the people who collectively make this nation. The health of any democracy is gauged by the freedom of the press, and unfortunately in the case of the OROP, not only has the media failed the test, but more importantly, the edifice of democracy of Independent India seems to have eroded and media seems to have become a ‘paid’ service. The less said on the subject – the better, though this is a grave matter and requires deeper introspection.

Selection System for Top Leadership in the Services

The system of civilian control over the military seems to be the most important story from this episode. Not only has the civil control reigned supreme, but the fact that veterans were allowed to be made out as ‘beggars’ and ‘irresponsible’ citizens in public should have been an affront to the military leadership of the day. Adding to the insult was the fact that the three Service Chief’s, in military regalia were made to sit as mute spectators on the high table from where the pronouncement on OROP was promulgated. If the idea was to publically display the solidarity of the Services with the government, it lacked conviction, as they contributed nothing but their presence. On the contrary, it displayed how pliant has the top echelons have become; indeed the very system of selection of Top Military Leadership requires a relook. Military leaders are groomed to win wars for the nations, not to be subservient lackeys. If they and the forces they command fail in war – the nation fails.

Conclusion

The chasm that has come between the civil and military is unfortunate. Indeed, if actions were to be seen in perspective, it seems that rather than reaching out and assuaging the grievances, insult was added to the hurt. In the year of celebrating the 1965 War, were veterans and their widows protesting in Jantar Mantar not more important than homage paid on India Gate?

It is also pertinent to reflect on the effect this agitation would have had on the morale of the uniformed rank and file and on their families. Can the anguish of an Old Veteran of ninety-four and his two Veteran Sons from Ludhiana be assuaged? What would be the feeling of his grandson, a serving army officer be when he has been witness to two generations of his own family fighting for honour and dignity?

By making a politically neutral military ‘politicised.’ another nail has been driven in the coffin. Ex-servicemen factions, with political backing or otherwise, were seen squabbling with each other. The spectacle of factions chorusing how the other side was peddling interests for petty gains was indeed a tragedy. If the military loses its self-respect and short charges its own (senior, though retired) leadership, it would be a sad day for the nation.

If a glass pane cracks, one may be able to piece the pieces together, but no amount of effort would make it whole again. The question that should bother all Indians in the light of this painful OROP episode is that: ‘has the glass pane cracked.’ If it has, it would be disastrous! If it has not, genuine efforts to bridge the gap should be made. I for one am an eternal optimist, and so are many Indians, and I am sanguine that with wisdom and sagacity from the top, we can collectively overcome this divide – if we fail, we fail as a nation.