Deepak Sinha
[It’s ironic that
issues like the arrest of a student activist or the death of a student
galvanises our politicians and public more than the grave issue of national
security]
Lance Naik Hanamanthappa Koppad’s gallant but
ultimately unsuccessful fight for survival is finally over and he has been
cremated with full military honours.
It is now time to
step back and introspect on the media hoopla, public mass hysteria and ersatz
patriotism that followed his death.
Indeed ironically,
his miraculous survival against all odds under 35 feet of ice for six days
forced people to sit up and take notice of the difficult challenges that our
military faces while defending our borders.
That public memory is
short and media attention is fleeting, comes as no surprise.
Media and public
focus, with attendant political activity, has now shifted to ‘graver’ issues of
the alleged anti-national activity and Government high-handedness at the
Jawaharlal Nehru University.
In all the petty
politics, other nine colleagues of Koppad who tragically lost their lives in
the same incident and also the superlative action, the grit, the courage and
determination displayed by all those who were involved in the search and rescue
operation, at great personal cost and physical danger, is all but forgotten.
Indeed, it is ironic that the tragic suicide by a
student or the arrest of a student activist galvanises our politicians and the
public more than either issues of national security or the pathetic
circumstances in which a vast majority of military veterans or their widows
survive.
One needs to accept
the hard reality that the military in this country is seen as nothing more than
security guards who is paid to protect the treasury; to be seen, but not heard.
That is why, the
sacrifice of a thousand of our soldiers who have been psychologically or
physically maimed while protecting our borders and their way of life have never
concerned the common man or the more privileged in their drawing rooms.
If it had,
Governments, over the years, would have been more empathetic and sensitive in
their dealings with the military.
We would then not have witnessed the unsavoury
sight of an 80-year-old war veteran being pushed around by policemen in the
name of ‘security’. Nor would there have been the necessity of the veterans to
protest or resort to hunger strikes against the Government’s deplorable
interpretation of the one-rank-one-pension imbroglio.
For that matter,
there would have been no need for the serving military Chiefs to object to the
Government against the horrendous recommendations of the Seventh Pay Commission
which has taken upon itself the task of demeaning and castrating the Armed
Forces, probably just to prove who’s the boss, by justifying its arguments with
mistruth and outright lies.
How else can one
justify paying bureaucrats double the ‘hardship allowance’ of that received by
those serving in Siachen while serving in Guwahati or elsewhere in the
North-East.
Or, why should the
paratroopers get ‘hazard allowance’ that is around 10 per cent of the
allowances received by personnel of the ‘Cobra’ battalion of the Central
Reserve Police Force deployed in Maoist-affected areas.
The Prime Minister certainly earned brownie points
for his unprecedented visit to the Army hospital where attempts were made to
revive Hanamanthappa. His
‘gracious’ gesture is to be welcomed, but it means little if such symbolism
continues to be at complete variance with the action initiated by his
Government to fulfill its promises made to the military earlier.
It may be recalled that former Prime Minister
Indira Gandhi had done exactly the same when she publicly credited the Armed
Forces for the 1971 victory, honoured its architect, Field Marshal Sam
Manekshaw, while quietly ensuring that their pensions were drastically cut,
compensations reduced and their prestige and standing eroded by the Third
Central Pay Commission.
It is in this context
that the action of the Congress, which was then in power, to refuse to send the
Defence Minister or the Service Chiefs to attend his funeral three decades
later, must be seen.
Soldiers, both serving veteran, are not stupid. They
will no longer be fooled by symbolism.
A vast majority of
the soldiers who toil for a living fully understand that the compensation they
receive only guarantees their loyalty to the extent that the organisation that
they serve looks after them.
We need to remember
that the men and women who join the military of their own volition do so not to
earn money, but because of their abiding faith in the country and what it
stands for.
Unfortunately, over the years, their expectations
have been belied and they have been let down by an uncaring public, scheming
politicians and self-serving bureaucrats.
The vital question that confronts us today
is: Are we worth for our soldiers
to die for?
The writer is a consultant
with Observer Research Foundation
No comments:
Post a Comment