A fine example of "Propaganda, with an Agenda" was published in weekly "FRONTLINE" (13 August), in an eight-page "essay" by AG Noorani, indiscriminately castigating some of our soldier-icons ! As such inchoate outpourings against our Armed Forces cannot be allowed to go unchallanged, I made a rejoinder which has already been published in the September issues of the "FORCE" and "DEFENCE WATCH" magazines (in "FORCE", a truncated version of the inevitably long rejoinder).
Maj Gen (Retd) Rajendra Prakash,
.
.
I am attaching a full version of my piece, in case you feel that it may be of some interest to the readers of "Report my Signal". I am afraid it is over-long, but Mr Noorani, a lawyer-cum-jornalist, needed to be answered in full.
.Maj Gen (Retd) Rajendra Prakash,
.
A prominent news-magazine in its latest issue carries an eight page ‘essay’, headed “Talkative Generals” with the byline of a veteran lawyer-cum-journalist, known for expressing strong individualistic opinions (“Frontline”, 13 August, 2010, pp 82- 89, article by AG Noorani). Provocative headers like, “It speaks for the strength of our democratic system that it survived those generals, who did much harm” and “But it should not condone the trespasses of such men anymore”, leave an ordinary reader, quivering with fear and apprehension of an imminent ‘coup d’ etat’ by the ‘talkative’ Indian Military. According to this well-known jurist/writer, our Armed Forces ever have had the propensity to go extra-constitutional and there is a dire need to come down heavily on this tendency, before things get out of hand. Considering that Indian Armed Forces carry an established reputation of being most apolitical, disciplined and constitution respecting , the startling conclusions presented by this ‘essay’ need to be debated. Every Indian in our talkative democracy is entitled to air her/his opinion, but other Indians also have the reciprocal right to confute, what they consider propaganda, with an “agenda”.
.
May I seek the hospitality of your columns to assert my right as a citizen/soldier to speak out against this deliberate reflection upon the honour of the Indian Armed Forces. I do this with the firm and widely shared conviction that the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force are the pillars of our Republic and our Constitution, which they sustain with their undivided loyalty, fidelity, staunchness, élan and a spirit of self-sacrifice.
.
The screed starts off with a gleeful reference to recent dismissal of General McChrystal of the US Army, as proving the “sound tradition of democratic governance” which “flows from the fundamental principle of civilian supremacy, over the military”. NOT so - what it proves is that an individual holding a high responsibility (a General officer with 34 years service) who lacks the discretion, self-discipline and basic good manners to restrain himself (or his staff) from implicit public abuse of his Commander-in-Chief, is not fit to continue with those responsibilities. Had McChrystal acted similarly towards his next military superior, the end-result would have been similar, on basis of military discipline, and not as a “fundamental principle of civilian supremacy”! Mind you whatever the Americans did, they did it with grace, with their Defence Minister ( Secretary of Defence), eulogizing McChrystal’s services at a special ceremonial send off , without a word about latter’s recent contretemps; American democracy is perceptive enough to cherish and sustain the ‘ultimate resort’ of their nation. We on the other hand lack any sensitivity to the “Morale” factor for sustenance of the “fighting spirit” of our Armed Forces - hear the speech from the Red Fort this 15 August, with not a word about those who safe-guard their Nation in the far flung reaches of our vast country, cheerfully doing their duty, without a thought for personal costs involved - physical, mental and emotional. Would this speech from the ramparts of ‘Lal Qila’ have even been possible, were it not for the fact that Indian Army, Navy and Air Force continue to exist, and remain effective.
.
Eight pages of “Talkative Generals” are an impassioned but inchoate and dismaying litany of perceived ‘wrongs’ said to have been committed by an assorted collation of Indian Army Chiefs and a few others (thankfully starting from 1966 only, thus sparing Field Marshal Carriappa and General Thimmaya, for us). This straightaway raises frivolous questions like, “why do our far-seeing and wise politicians appoint those as Chiefs, who seem to keep disappointing assorted shrewd observers like the author of this article ?” Or, “why should we have ‘dicey’ Army Chiefs at all, when a committee would do as well (on the popular model of 39 x ‘Groups of Ministers’, now running the country), surrounded as we are today, by ‘benign’ neighbours, with their ‘minor, peace-loving’ armies/navies and air forces ?”.
.
The narration covers too many assertions to be commented upon point by point, nor is a systematic ‘deconstruction’ of the narrative feasible here, to see what the author is really getting at, apart from excoriating General “Muchhu” Chaudhuri and esteemed “Sam Bahadur”, for holding conversations with British and American diplomats, 44 years ago; much water has flown down the Ganges since then and the World, India and the Indian Army are not what they were, so long ago ! It should suffice here to comment on a few broader issues touched upon, in the article.
.
Mid-article, the author generously concedes that the Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) is “not bereft of rights. He has not only a right but a duty to speak up publicly, depending on the circumstances, besides, of course, his right to voice his fears and objections to the Government in private. He is perfectly entitled to take the people into his confidence, if he is asked to achieve the impossible”. Then the article goes on to cite approvingly, assorted quotes from what Generals Padamnabhan, VP Malik and one of the J&K Corps Commanders said about the ever-present unease in the Kashmir Valley. He then ‘clears’ the present Chief of any ‘wrong doing’ in his public pronouncements on 30 June and 11 July (that the Army has done its bit, and now it is for the politicians to play their part and not again waste the conducive situation created by Army’s efforts). So what is the problem ? The problem is that what General VK Singh said now, may be alright, but what is not alright is that way back in 1966, Generals Chaudhry and Maneckshaw talked to and revealed some ‘secrets’ to British and American diplomats, and so Indian Army must be planning a coup even today, and so all Generals should ‘shut up’ now, and keep shut !!! (May be, CsOAS should be provided ‘minders’, who can give a political ‘ok’, before the Chiefs open their mouth any time !). Peeves and prejudices, not grounded in today’s realities, seem to have created a paranoia - Army is going to take over - save our souls ! But friends, Indian Armed Forces are far too sane and patriotic (a politically incorrect word for some), for there to be any such thought around (or capability even). Besides, we are bright enough to see the ‘shining’ example provided by our near neighbour of what military rule really produces, and by God, what a mess they have made of their beloved country !
.
First of all, for the author’s ‘bete noirs’, Generals Chaudhuri and Maneckshaw. The sole source for the tirade against these former CsOAS seems to be based on a collation of de-classified British and American diplomatic papers, by a distinguished, senior Pakistani civil servant, Roedad Khan. His compilations give an authentic inside look into post -Partition events on the sub-continent right up to 1969. You get most interesting insights into how others saw the momentous happenings in India and Pakistan; insights which may well differ from our own perceptions or from objective reality.
.
If YB Chavan decides to discuss the possibilities of a military coup with General JN Chaudhuri, should the COAS tell his political boss, the Defence Minister to shut-up ? Obviously there must have been some political angle to it - politicians wanting to ‘use’ the Army for a constitutional coup, with backing of the Rashtrapati, Dr Radhakrishnan !(Indra Gandhi tried to rope-in the Army for her Emergency, but was strongly spurned by a fellow Kashmiri Pandit and a soldier of high moral fibre, General KM Raina). The views the COAS gave to the Britisher were very proper, very correct and soldierly - categorically, possibility of a military take-over neither existed nor was it good for the Army - period ! As to why the COAS talked to a foreigner - well it is neither here nor there; Army Chief was a big person those days, British were the rulers not long ago and KCIOs were brought-up to be very much at home with ‘gora’s !
.
As for ‘Sam Bahadur’, he was a self-assured and flamboyant personality with much gravitas, who interacted even with haughty Indira Gandhi on his own terms, albeit correctly. As Commandant, Staff College he had been made to undergo the indignity of a court of inquiry, for his alleged bias towards the Britishers. No wonder that he felt besieged and vulnerable at that stage, when his becoming the next COAS was still moot. The fact that he talked ‘shop’ with the American counsel in Calcutta was because possibly he felt that he was too ‘big’ to be shackled by rules for every-bodies - by their very nature, outstanding military commanders consider themselves above such mundane things. In any case, ‘Sam Bahadur’ was too canny a soldier to give away, what he did not want to; he told the American that he had 3 lac troops in Eastern Command - so what ? Militarily, it signifies nothing, except that it impresses a civilian (I reckon, he deliberately inflated the figure !).
.
Now for some other bogies raised in ‘Talkative Generals’.
.
Siachen. Did General JJ Singh, as the COAS ‘sabotage’ Indo-Pak talks on Siachen imbroglio, by insisting on ‘no go’ unless Pakistani’s recognized and unbreachably confirmed the Actual Ground Position Line (AGPL). Well, the incumbent COAS would be guilty of betrayal of Indian Army and the men he commands, if he did any less - a strategically advantageous terrain, won by sacrifice of many, many lives, much human toil and misery for decades and expenditure of unlimited National wealth, would be occupied in a jiffy by Pakistanis, once we left it unverified and unguarded. No way, Sir ! With all the pious political and environmental platitudes uttered from time to time, the AGPL position will remain unchanged, till our friends across, see reason. (In any case, if the Establishment is so unhappy with ‘JJ’ over Siachen as alleged in the article, why did they bestow the sinecure of Arunachal on him ?). And no more ‘give-aways’ please - 1949 cease-fire in J&K, Haji Pir in 1965, 95,000 x PsOW in 1972 !
.
Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Except in war, or when guarding the international border, Indian Army has no constitutional authority to use force or fire-arms against anyone, whosoever. Like any other Indian citizen, the only legal right a soldier has, is the right of ‘private defence’ (of life or property), which must be proved post-facto, in a court of law, and this takes many years of court hearings. The only other possibility of such use of force by the Armed Forces is when called out in ‘aid to civil authority’, where a magistrate must be present at each spot, and she/he must allow the use of force in writing on a particular form, and only after completing these procedures can troops be ordered to use minimum force. Well, today’s terrorist/insurgent/militant/ Naxalite does not allow you the luxury of a magistrate’s presence, ready with a pen and form - you are shot dead or blown-up in a second, unless you are quicker and forestall him. Any military commander, COAS downwards, ordering his troops to operate (ambushes, cordons & searches or any counter-insurgency operation) against folks of this ilk, would be giving an UNLAWFUL command, not liable to be obeyed. If obeyed, and the operation is successful, it would land all commanders down the chain and whole corps, divisions, brigades, battalions, companies, platoons and infantry sections before the courts of law, on charges of murder, assault, injury and destruction of property, obviously leaving no time or resources for any more military activities, for years. So, to ensure that the Army is able to perform its basic function of external defence and internal security of the Nation, some pragmatic persons in 1950’s invented AFSPA for Naga Hills, and now it is applied on a ‘fire-fighting basis’ elsewhere also, NOT by the Indian Army but by the Government of India, when things get out of latter’s hand ! So before letting your heart bleed to death, understand one thing clearly - in a democracy, only the elected Government is mandated to govern - if it fails and cannot find political solutions, and needs to exert State power to enforce its writ, then Army may be called-in; but regretfully, NO AFSPA, NO ARMY. Ordering a soldier, who is also a citizen, to commit murder and mayhem is NOT a lawful command - apply AFPSA and it becomes a military operation, done in a military manner, with restraint and responsibility. Aberrations will occur amongst humans, will be punished severely and promptly, but these aberrations are not the policy. As simple as that ! So all those concerned with human rights need to be clear on this - abolish AFSPA, humanize it or whatever, but before that resolve politically or governance-wise, the problems which engender imposition of AFSPA (ie, convince the insurgents to stop insurgency, militants to stop militancy, terrorists to stop terror and Naxalites to stop mayhem). No one can order a soldier to obey an unlawful command, ie, to inflict violence without legitimate legal sanction. Thus, debates based on crass ignorance of ground realities are harmful for the community- it is like banning a book or a movie without having read/seen them. Soldiers are quite clear on where they stand on AFPSA, but are you ?
.
This interesting ‘essay’ has many other gems. It is embellished with some photos whose relevance to the context is hard to comprehend - Shri Manmohan Singh meeting BSF and CRPF personnel, General PP Kumaramangalam with his predecessor, ‘Sam Bahadur’ (of course looking very smart) and General NC Vij with his successor - but none of them appear to be ‘talking’ ! Then it goes on, “the penchant for idolizing the Army”, unfortunately “accentuated since Kargil, has not helped in the discussion, nor helped that splendid institution that has served the nation nobly, the Army” (was Kargil an aberration by that ‘noble’ institution, or by Parvez Musharaf ? And how many grand-children had you, fighting in Kargil, Mr Author ?). Next, “BJP is out to break all the rules in its mad craze for power” ( one thought, BJP is a legitimately elected political party - but then some Indian voters are indeed crazy !). Further, “large sections of public view the armed forces with awe that suspends judgment” (how silly is our public, but then the Army was “noble” up to one page back!). Some extensive quotes follow from an obscure British legal tome on “Constitutional and Administrative Law”, even though we adopted a written constitution for ourselves, way back in 1950, while the Brits don’t have any ! Also, in 1947, Lord Ismay saddled us with a temporary but weird ‘higher defence’ system (which we are too dumb to discard even after 63 years), while the British had one of their own, and have further evolved something altogether different from our system - so where is the relevance of such elaborate citations ?
.
It would be a pity not to quote another ‘gem’ from the article - while “insurgent is a human, insurgency is a movement, motivated by an idea” so, “it is one thing to use the gun against a violent insurgent” it is “another to use against those who peacefully propagate an idea in meetings and processions”. Bravo - no sooner said then we have the living proof in Srinagar, Sopore, Pampore ‘et al’ in August, 2010, of what this hair-splitting and vicious ideology means - how many stones thrown in these “peaceful” meetings and processions ? How many policemen maimed and injured “peacefully” ? Who has evolved and is organizing these “peaceful”, ideological gatherings, (pathrao) ?
.
The aim and objective of any intelligence organization worth its name, is to spread alarm and despondency amongst the Armed Forces of the target country, so that their morale, élan, self-esteem and effectiveness are subverted in peacetime, thereby reducing their war-making potential. With our great penchant for self-goals, the task of much-maligned ISI becomes that much easier, because we manage to do it ourselves ! For instance, the Establishment, having failed to ensure ethical Defence procurements over the years, has black-listed each and every artillery gun manufacturer in the world today. With no new guns coming in these last 30 years, will we make-up for shortfalls in battle-winning artillery support for our troops, by loading the guns with “audit objections” and ‘minutes of the meetings”, and firing them at the enemy ? A gun-busting saboteur could not do it better ! Similarly, conjectural and speculative literature of such nature, cannot contribute to the morale, self-esteem and efficiency of our Armed Forces ! No doubt, our Armed Forces are no more (and no less) sacrosanct than any other State institution, nor any less accountable to the citizens, but they certainly need to be upheld in our own self-interest.
.
Quoting anyone out of proper context is unethical, especially in the field of journalism. This essay is full of random quotes from various operational commanders (some of whose faces, the author obviously did not like), juxtaposed willy nilly to buffer its arguments. But what leaves the reader wondering, is the timing and necessity of this journalistic foray, and its arcane logic that our democracy “should not condone the trespasses of such men anymore” ! Who do you want to arraign ?
.
General JN Chaudhuri and Field Marshal SHFJ Maneckshaw are dead and in heaven, God rest their noble souls. The ‘essay’ gives clearance to what General VK Singh, the present Army Chief has said. So who is to be hanged, drawn and quartered ? For what misdemeanor and on what exact charge ? Having raised these issues, the author needs to provide clear-cut answers.
Yours faithfully,
No comments:
Post a Comment