Pages

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Armed Forces Personnel are the backbone of India’s stability and security. Nation must focus on their welfare


Rajeev Chandrasekhar, Member of Parliament & Entrepreneur
From a security point of view, as a nation, we are faced with unprecedented transformations and challenges around us – As nations like Bangladesh, Burma and Sri Lanka attempt to transform into stable democratic nations, some others in our region pose challenges and represent clear and present danger to our nation.   Some of these neighbours represent very different forms of challenges to us as a country and to our Security – be it to shipping lanes or geopolitical influence or proxy terrorism attacks. Countries that have engaged in a proxy war with India will eventually fail – faced, as they have so far, with the determination of all Indians, but more specifically with the indomitable and undefeatable spirit of, patriotism and service of the many generations of our servicemen and women and their families. These men and their families form the basic backbone of this nation’s efforts at providing a stable and secure country for all its people.
 
It is about these men and women and their families that I wish to speak about today. Our Defence Minister is one of the most decent and unassuming men that I have come across in our Politics. I am sure he realizes that as Defence Minister and civilian custodian of the Defence Ministry – he is, in effect, the trustee of the great institution that is the Indian Armed forces and the millions of men and women and their families that have served and are serving and will serve this nation in times of war and peace. 
It is to this role as trustee of the Armed Forces that I address him today. He is aware that our nation has had to fight and defend itself against many aggressions and wars and is being challenged almost every day on various fronts .He is aware that the country has asked thousands of young men and women and their families to a call of duty – and to sacrifice life and limb to protect our nation and all our people over the last several decades. He is aware that almost every day since Independence till today, some family somewhere is asked to go through the pain of knowing that they have lost a family member in service of the nation. India is the only country that does not have a Military Memorial to honour sacrifices of brave men and womenHe is also aware that despite all this, we the people of India and indeed, the Government of India, have failed in our duty and continue to fail - to build a National Military Memorial in our nation’s capital to honor these sacrifices and service to the nation.  Every nation honors its heroes who have perished on the battlefield with a memorial, except us. 
My state Government of Karnataka has undertaken the project of a Memorial and it will be completed soon. It will be inscribed with names of each and every son of Karnataka who died in the service of our nation. But a National Memorial for all the sons and daughters of India, who have perished, is missing in Delhi.This is a shame and embarrassment which should NOT be allowed to continue. I urge him, as I have been urging the Government for several years, to act on this. Do not leave this in the hands of a group of insensitive bureaucrats to comprehend the deep emotional need for the country, and indeed, the families of those who perished, to have this memorial.
One Rank, One Pension is a deeply emotional issue. 
This is a deeply emotional issue of honor for many thousands of retired soldiers and their families. We must not forget that our veterans have served this country under the most trying of economic and security challenges.  We must not forget that whilst all around us in our region, militaries subverted democracies – the men of our Armed Forces protected it and helped it grow into what we are today. Honor isn’t a concept that is very well understood or respected in the corridors of Delhi, but sir, I urge you to recognize honor and pride which is what makes a man put his life on the line for his nation – placing his country ahead of himself and his family or religion. The Standing Committee on Defence has recommended OROP. Recently, the Committee on Petitions, Rajya Sabha - comprising of all Parties – has, after detailed consultations and hearings on the matter, tabled its Report in the Parliament on 19 December 2011, recommending the immediate implementation of OROP and constitution of a separate commission to determine pay and other service  conditions and  benefits  of the Armed Forces. But even now, the Defence Ministry refuses to act on this, and the old excuse trotted out by the bureaucracy that all other central services will ask for it certainly holds no merit, because of the very different nature of serving in the Armed Forces.  The right thing for the Hon’ble Minister to do is to respect the views of Parliament and MPs, as has been communicated to him on more than one occasion. Ignoring the sense of Parliament on this issue would be wrong and a big error on his part. 
Both these issues are not about money. Given the amount of money that is wasted or frittered away or even looted from the Government – these amounts for the OROP and Military Memorial are nothing. In an overall defence budget of Rs.1,94,000 crores, this will be insignificant in terms of cost – but very, very powerful in terms of the message it communicates to the men and women in uniform. This is about our determination or lack of interest to do the right thing by our servicemen and doing the right thing by the idea of service to the nation. 
Nominate Armed Forces Veterans to Parliament: Does Serving in Kargil and Siachen rank at least as high as cricket or movies ?
Lastly, before I end, let me touch on another issue – A few months ago, I had written to the PM and the Defence Minister, and also raised a Special Mention in Parliament about nominating an Armed Forces Veteran to the Parliament who can be the voice of the over one crore ex-servicemen and their families. I was given an answer saying the Constitution doesn’t permit it. Be that as it may, if the Government can consider Cricket and Film stars as icons of National service, I would urge the Defence Minister to consider nominating Veterans to at least one of the nominated Seats in Parliament. I think he would agree that battlefield service in Kargil, Siachen etc to the nation ranks at least as high as cricket or movies. Sir, as we move forward as a nation, our Armed Forces needs to continue to attract the best and most motivated of our young generation in service of our country.  Let us do these basic fundamental duties by the generations that have served us and let them inspire the future generations to serve. Let them be confident that the country and people haven’t forgotten their service and value their service to our country. 
And to our Defence Minister, I would like to quote our own Kautilya, the great political strategist, who wrote to Chandragupta Maurya centuries ago: “The day the soldier has to demand his dues will be a sad day for Magadha. For then on that day, you will have lost all moral sanction to be king”.  
Jai Hind.
 
(Speech made by Rajeev Chandrasekhar during the debate in Parliament on the working of Ministry of Defence. May 07, 2012)

 

 



Sycophancy is reigning Currency of the Congress


Vivek Gumaste

(Courtesy trail mail)

It is not the exponential expansion of Robert Vadra’s fiscal fortunes that skyrocketed from a paltry Rs 50 lakh to an astounding Rs 300 crore in an incredibly brief span of five years that I find most revolting. In a world of scams that run into hundreds and thousands of crores, Vadra’s profiteering is negligible. Neither is it the alleged tacit quid pro quo of the Vadra-DLF-Haryana nexus that raises my hackles. Not even Vadra’s disparaging comment of ‘mango men in a banana republic’ provokes me to express my bile. It is something else.
 
The l’affaire Vadra brings to the fore a far more serious malady than the ostensible crony capitalism that it suggests; a rot that strikes at the very heart of our democracy; an ugly affliction that portends disastrous consequences for the nation’s long-term stability: namely, the extent and depth of sycophancy that pervades India’s premier political party.  Sycophancy is the reigning currency of the Congress party.  

The scene was reminiscent of medieval times with bumbling court jesters rushing in to outdo one another in their demonstration of loyalty to their master, or mistress to be precise. No sooner had Arvind Kejriwal listed his charges against Vadra that a posse of apologists sprung to Vadra’s defence; a defence team that comprised top-ranking members of the Union Cabinet such as Corporate Affairs Minister M Veerappa Moily and Finance Minister P Chidambaram; even the governor of a state far removed from New Delhi chimed in to join this chorus of bootlicking flattery. 

In an exercise that depicted the worst of toadying behaviour, these self-appointed guardians of Vadra’s virtue hurled vicious counter-accusations at members of India Against Corruption, and hallucinated about dark conspiracies in a fit of indignant rage. But the basic premise was clear: how could anyone dare target the son-in-law of the Congress’s First Family. To drive home this point further, the upright IAS officer Ashok Khemka probing the matter was promptly transferred.  

Sadly, what was missing in this entire defence operation was what mattered most: a fact-based rebuttal. Allegations cannot be countered by merely ratcheting up the decibel of refutation; they warrant a direct logical response. By this knee-jerk response, the Congress party bared itself to reveal its true persona: the fiefdom of a single family; a polity that places a premium on the interests of its First Family than on the principles germane to the well-being of the country.  

Sonia Gandhi’s uninterrupted, election-free 14-year tenure as the President of the Indian National Congress is a unique achievement—one that is unmatched by even past stalwarts. Jawaharlal Nehru was a giant who strode the Indian political scene like a colossus, yet his tenure as Congress party president included three terms of one year and two terms of two years for a cumulative total of seven years. Even Indira Gandhi, despite her dictatorial streak, found it prudent to restrict herself to two terms—one lasting five years and the other two. From 1885 to the late 1960s, it was the norm for party presidents to have a term not exceeding one year with rare exceptions. An entrenched leadership not subject to internal elections thrives on and sustains servility.  

Sycophancy is a tool that seeks illegitimate ascendancy by pandering to the ego of insecure weak leaders, thwarting ethical values and displacing merit in the process. These two entities feed into each other to engender a warped culture of debased values. A ruling party afflicted with this canker spells disaster for the country. The gubernatorial deficiencies of the Congress-led UPA government is testimony to the ill-effects of this scourge.  

The party that was built up by the likes of Lokmanya Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru needs to be restored to its former self to fulfil its role as one of two national parties. 


Gumaste is a US-based commentator and academic

Friday, October 19, 2012

Armed Forces Personnel are the backbone of India’s stability and security. Nation must focus on their welfare

Rajeev Chandrashekhar 
From a security point of view, as a nation, we are faced with unprecedented transformations and challenges around us – As nations like Bangladesh, Burma and Sri Lanka attempt to transform into stable democratic nations, some others in our region pose challenges and represent clear and present danger to our nation.   Some of these neighbours represent very different forms of challenges to us as a country and to our Security – be it to shipping lanes or geopolitical influence or proxy terrorism attacks.
Countries that have engaged in a proxy war with India will eventually fail – faced, as they have so far, with the determination of all Indians, but more specifically with the indomitable and undefeatable spirit of, patriotism and service of the many generations of our servicemen and women and their families. These men and their families form the basic backbone of this nation’s efforts at providing a stable and secure country for all its people.
It is about these men and women and their families that I wish to speak about today.
Our Defence Minister is one of the most decent and unassuming men that I have come across in our Politics. I am sure he realizes that as Defence Minister and civilian custodian of the Defence Ministry – he is, in effect, the trustee of the great institution that is the Indian Armed forces and the millions of men and women and their families that have served and are serving and will serve this nation in times of war and peace.
It is to this role as trustee of the Armed Forces that I address him today.
He is aware that our nation has had to fight and defend itself against many aggressions and wars and is being challenged almost every day on various fronts.

He is aware that the country has asked thousands of young men and women and their families to a call of duty – and to sacrifice life and limb to protect our nation and all our people over the last several decades.
He is aware that almost every day since Independence till today, some family somewhere is asked to go through the pain of knowing that they have lost a family member in service of the nation.
India is the only country that does not have a Military Memorial to honour sacrifices of brave men and women
He is also aware that despite all this, we the people of India and indeed, the Government of India, have failed in our duty and continue to fail - to build a National Military Memorial in our nation’s capital to honor these sacrifices and service to the nation.  Every nation honors its heroes who have perished on the battlefield with a memorial, except us.
My state Government of Karnataka has undertaken the project of a Memorial and it will be completed soon. It will be inscribed with names of each and every son of Karnataka who died in the service of our nation. But a National Memorial for all the sons and daughters of India, who have perished, is missing in Delhi.
This is a shame and embarrassment which should NOT be allowed to continue. I urge him, as I have been urging the Government for several years, to act on this. Do not leave this in the hands of a group of insensitive bureaucrats to comprehend the deep emotional need for the country, and indeed, the families of those who perished, to have this memorial.
One Rank, One Pension is a deeply emotional issue
This is a deeply emotional issue of honor for many thousands of retired soldiers and their families. We must not forget that our veterans have served this country under the most trying of economic and security challenges.  We must not forget that whilst all around us in our region, militaries subverted democracies – the men of our Armed Forces protected it and helped it grow into what we are today. Honor isn’t a concept that is very well understood or respected in the corridors of Delhi, but sir, I urge you to recognize honor and pride which is what makes a man put his life on the line for his nation – placing his country ahead of himself and his family or religion.
The Standing Committee on Defence has recommended OROP. Recently, the Committee on Petitions, Rajya Sabha - comprising of all Parties – has, after detailed consultations and hearings on the matter, tabled its Report in the Parliament on 19 December 2011, recommending the immediate implementation of OROP and constitution of a separate commission to determine pay and other service  conditions and  benefits  of the Armed Forces.
But even now, the Defence Ministry refuses to act on this, and the old excuse trotted out by the bureaucracy that all other central services will ask for it certainly holds no merit, because of the very different nature of serving in the Armed Forces.  The right thing for the Hon’ble Minister to do is to respect the views of Parliament and MPs, as has been communicated to him on more than one occasion. Ignoring the sense of Parliament on this issue would be wrong and a big error on his part.
Both these issues are not about money. Given the amount of money that is wasted or frittered away or even looted from the Government – these amounts for the OROP and Military Memorial are nothing. In an overall defence budget of Rs.1,94,000 crores, this will be insignificant in terms of cost – but very, very powerful in terms of the message it communicates to the men and women in uniform. This is about our determination or lack of interest to do the right thing by our servicemen and doing the right thing by the idea of service to the nation.
Nominate of Armed Forces Veterans to Parliament: Does Serving in Kargil and Siachen rank atleast as high as cricket or movies ?
Lastly, before I end, let me touch on another issue – A few months ago, I had written to the PM and the Defence Minister, and also raised a Special Mention in Parliament about nominating an Armed Forces Veteran to the Parliament who can be the voice of the over one crore ex-servicemen and their families. I was given an answer saying the Constitution doesn’t permit it. Be that as it may, if the Government can consider Cricket and Film stars as icons of National service, I would urge the Defence Minister to consider nominating Veterans to at least one of the nominated Seats in Parliament. I think he would agree that battlefield service in Kargil, Siachen etc to the nation ranks at least as high as cricket or movies.
Sir, as we move forward as a nation, our Armed Forces needs to continue to attract the best and most motivated of our young generation in service of our country.  Let us do these basic fundamental duties by the generations that have served us and let them inspire the future generations to serve. Let them be confident that the country and people haven’t forgotten their service and value their service to our country.
And to our Defence Minister, I would like to quote our own Kautilya, the great political strategist, who wrote to Chandragupta Maurya centuries ago: “The day the soldier has to demand his dues will be a sad day for Magadha. For then on that day, you will have lost all moral sanction to be king”.
Jai Hind.
(Speech made by Rajeev Chandrasekhar during the debate in Parliament on the working of Ministry of Defence. May 07, 2012)

Ajay Shukla: Don't fight 1962 all over again

 

Don’t fight 1962 all over again



The Nyamjang Chu river, just after it flows into India at Khinzemane, near the Namka Chu, where the Sino-Indian war of 1962 began

By Ajai Shukla
(Business Standard, 16th Oct 12)
 
Who won the 1962 Sino-Indian war? This might seem a fatuous question, especially to those reeling under the tsunami of gloomy articles leading into the 50th anniversary of the war that began on the Namka Chu rivulet on Oct 20th, 1962. But consider this fact: since 1962 Arunachal Pradesh has turned increasingly Indian, emphatically regarding itself a part of this country. Meanwhile, Tibet simmers resentfully as Beijing’s relationship with those easygoing people is conducted through the might of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA); a plethora of truncheon-happy Chinese paramilitaries that arrest protesters before they can protest; a demographic invasion by hundreds of thousands of ethnic Han Chinese workers; and a coercive relocation of locals that has shattered traditional pastoral lifestyles.
So how is it that, even after having been whipped in war, India is winning the peace? And that China, despite having “taught India a lesson” in 1962, and having subdued Tibet with a brutal occupation, feels challenged today from both sides of the McMahon Line --- the disputed border in the Eastern Himalayas between Tibet and Arunachal Pradesh. In Tibet, since 2008, Beijing confronts a rising tide of protest. And in India it sees a growing military build up, and a Tibetan exile organisation that amplifies worldwide the repression that China perpetuates within Tibet.
In contrast, India’s restraint and sensitivity and reluctance to use military force in establishing administration across the North East Frontier Agency (NEFA) --- as Arunachal was then called --- certainly won over locals to the idea of India, but it also contained within it the seeds of the 1962 defeat. The aversion to overt demonstration of force was evident during India’s 1951 occupation of Tawang, when Assistant Political Officer, R Kathing, marched into that border town with just one platoon (36 soldiers) of the paramilitary Assam Rifles.
And at Achingmori in 1953, when Tagin tribals massacred an Assam Rifles platoon, Nari Rustomji, the Special Advisor to the Governor of Assam who administered NEFA, famously stopped Nehru from retaliating with a burn-and-slash military expedition or executing his threat to bomb the Tagins. Instead, Rustomji sent a largely civilian expedition into Tagin country, arrested the culprits, convicted them after a procedurally impeccable trial in a makeshift bamboo courthouse, and jailed them for a few years. Word spread quickly across the area.
But placing local sensibilities above national security also created the mindset that led to the 1962 defeat. The same mistrust in force that won over the local people also underlay the reluctance to deploy the army in adequate numbers, even though that was essential for backstopping an ill-considered “forward policy” that involved establishing Indian posts along a unilaterally decided border. The result: a stinging military defeat for India that undermined its image in local eyes.
Today, 50 years later, with a wealthier and more assertive India comfortable with the idea of deploying and wielding military power, it is important to remember the lessons of the 1950s in planning how to counter any Chinese adventurism. Firstly, in-your-face military deployment is not something that Arunachalis are comfortable with, even though the military is sometimes the only government that tribal people in remote areas actually see. In the 2010s and 2020s as in the 1950s and 1960s, local support for India will count for as much as military power in ensuring that Arunachal remains a part of India.
India’s military, like every self-perpetuating bureaucracy, has made a convincing case for raising four new divisions to defend the eastern sector, including two divisions that will be part of a proposed mountain strike corps. The two defensive mountain divisions are already functional, while the mountain strike corps and an armoured brigade are currently being cleared.
But no amount of soldiers can provide a foolproof defence along hundreds of kilometres of rugged mountain terrain. And in raising division after division of defensive troops, India risks falling into the Pakistan trap: getting involved in a competitive military build-up against a giant neighbour that has far greater resources of money and military power.
Instead, the Indian Army needs to rethink its strategy, relying on local partnership as in the 1950s, rather than on an overwhelming presence that could start being resented. This must involve a three-fold action plan: firstly, recruit at least twenty territorial army battalions from local tribes, which will defend their homeland fiercely against the Chinese, rather than relying on regular army battalions that are posted into these unknown areas from their bases thousands of kilometres away. These local tribal battalions must form the first line of defence.
Secondly, rather than committing the bulk of our regular army battalions into defensive deployments aimed at stopping the Chinese at the border, reorganise these formations into offensive strike groups that are geared, trained and equipped to retaliate against any Chinese incursion with counter-incursions into Tibet. There should be 8-10 such fully developed contingency plans ready for execution, along with the resources to execute them with.
Thirdly, create the infrastructure of roads and railways in Arunachal and Assam that will be needed to mobilise the offensive strike groups and transport them to the border fast enough to pre-empt any Chinese counter deployment. This is perhaps the most essential step needed, since it will serve both a military and civil purpose. In providing road connectivity to villages along the McMahon Line, we are providing a lifeline that ties them to India.

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Half Century down-‘Are we Stabbing the Dead…Yet Again?

M.G.Devasahayam

 Etched in stone, this soul-wringing message from 'dead soldiers' greets you as you enter the famed Kohima War Cemetery: "When you go home, tell them of us and say, for your tomorrow we gave our today." As one takes a round of the Cemetery, one sees hundreds of small plaques with the words ‘Known Unto God’, meaning that we do not even know the names of the valiant men who gave their lives so that we may live. Can there be a more poignant sacrifice? That was Second World War.

 What about the Indo-China war, the first and the most devastating that India has fought post-Independence? Do we remember the near 3000 men, who caught unawares, laid down their lives in a desperate bid to save the honour of the Indian Army and the integrity of the Indian nation? Do the names of Major BK Pant, Lieutenant Subash Chander, Naib-Subedar Snehuneshu Biswas, Havildar Phani Bhushan Nayak, Naik Joybandhu Datta, Sepoy Jag Pal Singh…and many, many others ring a bell?

These are but a few random names taken from a list of the brave sons of India who died on the night of 19/20 October 1962 at Nam Ka Chu when the Chinese attacked 2nd Rajput positions at the base of the Thagla Ridge beyond the Zimithang Valley in NEFA (now Arunachal Pradesh). This was the beginning of the bloody clash across the previously considered ‘impregnable’ Himalayas that caught the Indian leadership napping and left 2,420 officers and men dead in this theatre alone.

A brief recap. By October 1962, an Infantry Division had operational control of the NEFA border with 34 Assam Rifles posts of section/platoon strength established all along the McMahon Line. As the fighting started on 19 October, the Chinese crossed the McMahon Line in other sectors also, always in much superior numbers. Despite the surprise and all the hardships faced due to lack of even basic defensive requirements, at no stage did any of the army units fail to resist the Chinese onslaught giving rise to the phrase ‘last man, last round’!

Much earlier, in the 1950s itself General Cariappa had apprehended trouble on the McMahon Line and had outlined his plan for NEFA suggesting some urgent measures. Having heard him out Nehru flared up, thumped hard on the table and said: “It is not the business of the Commander-in-Chief to tell the Prime Minister who is going to attack us there. In fact the Chinese will defend our Eastern Frontier. You mind only Kashmir and Pakistan.” A deflated and disappointed Cariappa walked out of the Prime Minister’s office.

Subsequent advice from Deputy Prime Minister Sardar Vallabhai Patel on similar lines, led to some lukewarm motions to set right things. But subsequently Defence Minister VK Krishna Menon, in an arrogant manner kept on belittling the Army Chief General KS Thimayya. Besides interference in promotions and the schism that had been created, Menon was poking into strategic matters compelling General Thimayya to tender his resignation. That Prime Minister Nehru talked him out of it and later berated him in Parliament is history. Thimayya’s humiliation was a severe blow not only to his own honour but the prestige of the Army as a combat institution.

To cap it all, on Thimayya’s retirement he was replaced by General Pran Thapar instead of the more competent Lt General SPP Thorat who was expected to take over as Army Chief. The country paid a very heavy price for this manipulation at the very top.

End-result of the humiliating defeat in the Indo-Chinese war under the watch of General Thapar saw the entire blame shifted to the Army. Today the road leading up to Sena Bhawan is ‘Krishna Menon Marg’ and his larger than life statue adorns one corner of Army HQ. But all those who sacrificed with their life and blood have been forgotten, their names ‘known only unto God’. Indeed true of an ungrateful nation: “God and the Soldier, all adore; in times of danger and not before. When danger is past and everything righted, God is forgotten and the old Soldier slighted”

Where are we now, half a century after those fateful days that shook the country’s conscience? What is the state of the Army, its preparedness, its morale and the fighting spirit of its officers and men? Army Chief General Bikram Singh says everything is hunky-dory and roses all the way.  Speaking a month before the 50th anniversary of China’s military offensives he said: “I am assuring the nation as the Army Chief that 1962 will not be repeated... No way. We have plans in place on all borders to safeguard our country’s territorial integrity.”

But, when the integrity of the Army itself has been severely eroded in recent times, how the Army Chief’s tall claim is even tenable? In June 2012 Admiral L. Ramdas, former Naval Chief, along with few former senior civil and military officers including the writer wrote to the Prime Minister and Defence Minister highlighting several serious issues haunting the Army:

·       A serving Army Chief denied justice and forced to move the Supreme Court only to face the embarrassment of being advised to ‘blow with the wind’;

·       Bribe offered to a serving Army Chief for defence deals, in his own office;

·       Corruption charges in the procurement of defence equipment (TATRA) from a serving Army Chief, and he being hounded because of that;

·       `Top Secret’ letter from the serving Army Chief to the Prime Minister about the near-total unpreparedness of the Army and its leak from Cabinet Secretariat tantamounting to treasonable act;

·       Totally false and fabricated accusations that a serving Army Chief was responsible for spying/snooping on the Defence Minister’s office;

·       Insidious insinuation of military coup, casting aspersion on the serving Army Chief which virtually meant  instigating mutiny in the Army;

·       PIL and Review Petition by responsible citizens for safeguarding the institutional integrity of the Army and the same being disposed of in a cavalier and perfunctory manner;

·       Raising the `communal bogey’ to divert attention from the charge of creation of a ‘line of succession’ at senior echelons of the Army that has demoralized the Officer cadre.

All these are symptoms of a deeper malaise within the system– indicating years of brushing uncomfortable questions under the carpet thereby adversely affecting the morale of the serving personnel. The continuous failure of the top civil and political leadership to  address the steady erosion in the ethical framework which had always provided the underpinning for decision making at the highest levels, has only reinforced a growing feeling of discontent and cynicism. There is a widespread perception that while the rank and file is subjected to severe disciplinary action for even minor offences, those higher up, with the right connections, can get away with anything! Not only is this reflected in the most recent appointments to the highest offices within the Army, but also, and more seriously, has led to the disturbing view, circulating at many levels, that it is not worth fighting for a country that is in the grip of ‘corrupt and conniving characters’.

No wonder, the powers-that-be do not want to respond to these very pointed posers and apprehensions. It looks as if the ‘adhocracies’ in the Ministry of Defence and Army Headquarters have entered into a ‘kleptocratic pact’ that could make the repeat of 1962 very much possible. Because winning and losing is not on the borders of the country, but in the heart and mind of every soldier.

Where does it leave ‘We, The People’? Sure, in the next few weeks we will again dust out our good-old Lata Mangeshkar ‘Mere Wattan ke logo’ LPs and shed a passing tear or two before moving on to the more mundane matter of surviving in modern-day India.
Were the boys who died in the high Himalayas alive today they would be in their 70s. Having been commissioned in the Army soon after the 1962 war, I sometimes wonder whether they were the lucky ones who have been spared the agony of seeing the rot that the country and its institutions are today. And then ask a mind-wrenching question: ‘Are we Stabbing the Dead…Yet Again?’

[Author is a former Army and IAS Officer. Email: mgd@airtelmail.in)

 

Monday, October 15, 2012

The Siachen Story: Himalayan Blunder by India’s Government




Lt Ge (Retd) Prakash Chand Katoch,  
 

The Indian government is acting against the interests of the country by surreptitiously agreeing to a deal with Pakistan according to which it will withdraw troops from Siachen Glacier, the command of which gives India immense strategic advantages.

India is committing a historical strategic blunder by quietly agreeing to Pakistan’s demand for withdrawing from Saltoro Ridge in Siachen glacier. The Indian public and parliament have been kept in the dark. A backroom deal has been concluded through questionable intermediaries with close ties to Pakistan.

Since November 2011, militaries of both India and Pakistan have held several rounds to boost confidence building measures. These meetings were held in Dubai (20-21 November 2011), Bangkok (23-25 February 2012) and Lahore (23-25 September 2012). Additionally, working group meetings took place in Chiang Mai (21 April 2012) and Palo Alto (30-31 July 2012). In the Track II round held in Lahore in September this year, India and Pakistan signed an agreement to demilitarize Siachen despite the grave reservations of some members of the Indian delegation. The members who expressed reservations include a former ambassador, a former intelligence officer and two former officers from the Army and the Navy.

The decision to de-militarize or rather withdraw from Siachen has been taken arbitrarily at the highest political level disregarding strong objections by successive army chiefs including the current chief, Gen Bikram Singh. He has even made a statement to the media opposing demilitarization of the glacier. The agreement mainly includes: setting up a joint commission to delineate the line beyond NJ 9842, the map coordinate south of the incompletely demarcated disputed territory; joint authentication of present ground positions; determination of places for redeployment; disengagement and demilitarization in mutually acceptable time frame, and cooperative monitoring of activities to ensure transparency. The agreement states that re-occupation cannot be done speedily. This is absurd as it negates India’s ability to use helicopters for lightning occupation. This gives Pakistan a huge advantage because the western flanks and glacial valleys of the Saltoro ridge are controlled by Pakistan. They do not have snow during summer and can be reached under cover of darkness and of bad weather on foot. The provision for technical surveillance is a red herring because of the tough terrain and extreme weather. It is important to remember that because of these conditions even the US with all its technical resources was surprised by India’s nuclear tests of 1998.

The Indian government briefed the Lahore Track II Team to keep in mind the army’s stand that further talks would only be taken up "after" positions of both sides were authenticated on ground. The Indian Army’s concerns have clearly been ignored. The strategic importance of the Saltoro Ridge, especially in relation to Gilgit-Baltistan, Northern Areas, Shaksgam and Wakhan Corridor has been systematically obfuscated by a government that retains far too much of power over electronic and print media. The government has carried out a massive public relations exercise using gullible television channels to transmit the message that Siachen has no strategic significance. At one point, one so called expert claimed that India holds the Karakoram Pass, which is a blatant lie. National dailies have refused to publish articles highlighting the enormous strategic disadvantage of withdrawing from Siachen. Similarly, this issue has not been debated on national television. There are rumors that the media is muffling any discussion on Siachen on the instructions of the government.

The selection of Indian delegates who visited Lahore was incongruous. None of them had served in the Siachen, not even the six army officers who were part of the delegation. The negotiating team did not bother to visit the conflict zone despite months of parleys with Pakistani officials at beautiful locations. Two former army officers in the delegating are infamous for their political connections and it is rumored that they will be appointed state governors or ambassadors as a reward for towing the official line.

It is surmised that the government is aiming for a Nobel Peace Prize to recover the legitimacy that it has lost after a succession of scandals. The Indian military has been castrated and is not allowed to state its views. Veterans who oppose de-militarization are denied media forums. It is inconceivable that any other major power would shut its military out of decision making and discourse the way India is doing at the moment.

Jehangir Karamat, the former army chief heading the Pakistani delegation, understands the strategic significance of Saltoro unlike his Indian counterparts. Under his leadership, Pakistan has grabbed the strategic opportunity to attain all its key goals. The Atlantic Council of Canada that acted as the peace broker has promptly put out the news on the net.

ShujaHYPERLINK "http://www.acus.org/users/shuja-nawaz" HYPERLINK "http://www.acus.org/users/shuja-nawaz"Nawaz, a Pakistani strategic analyst who heads the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council of the US, has close relations with his Canadian counterparts. More worryingly, he has close ties with the Pakistani military and is said to be a trusted advisor to both Gen Kayani and Gen Musharraf. Indians have long distrusted the Atlantic Council, which is perceived to be in bed with the Pakistani military and which has never really concluded its Cold War love affair with Pakistan. It is incredible that India should agree to the Atlantic Council as a mediator as it is unlikely to be a disinterested party and, as per the old adage, Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion.

The Line of Control between India and Pakistan was originally drawn on a 1:250,000 map with a thick sketch pen without military advice. This has left an ambiguity as to the location of any given point on this line to the tune of about a hundred meters. Furthermore, the line does not follow ridgelines creating a source of constant and persisting hostility and acrimony. The same thick pen may be used once again in Siachen to devastating effect. A withdrawal from Siachen would facilitate further Pakistani incursions into Kashmir and put Ladakh, the Buddhist part of the state, under threat.

Gen Pervez Musharraf, the former Pakistani president and army chief, mentions in his autobiography, ‘In The line of Fire, that he was planning to put a battalion on Saltoro Ridge. Indian officers preempted his move. Since 1984, Pakistan has been trying to control Siachen. Pakistan invaded India in 1999 to control Kargil and cut off Siachen. Pakistan is attempting to eradicate its strategic disadvantage through both military and non military measures. People in Shia dominated Baltistan, the place close to Siachen Glacier, are being forcibly converted to Sunni Islam. The Pakistani state often sponsors Shia massacres. The idea is to create a strong base for Pakistani troops to advance from when they make their next move.

If India withdraws from Siachen, the new defense line will need additional troops. The new number will be many times the number of troops holding Siachen presently and the costs to the exchequer will increase exponentially. The joint agreement innocuously says in Annexure II, "small-scale intrusions are neither significant nor sustainable". This is absurd. Small scale intrusions can easily take place undetected in areas devoid of snow during summer months. They can then be staging posts for infiltration. The Indian army lost the flower of its youth in 1999 when Pakistani troops intruded to take the heights in Kargil. With no defense line in Siachen, Ladakh will be open to infiltration. Irregulars and members of the Taliban will be able to cross into territory that belongs to India while Pakistan will deny culpability for ‘non-state-actors’. Gen Musharraf once declared that there would be many more Kargils in the future. Withdrawing from Siachen will make the general’s declaration a reality.

The public and the parliament have the right to ask the government why the Siachen issue has not been debated publicly and in the parliament. What exactly has Pakistan done to earn Indian trust? Has the anti-India terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir been dismantled? Has any progress been made in punishing the perpetrators of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks? Has the government forgotten that Pakistan has repeatedly double crossed us? During a visit by a delegation from Pakistan to discuss confidence building measures, why was the Pakistan Army breaching the ceasefire? Why is the Pakistan arming and stoking insurgencies in India? Why is the Pakistani intelligence trying to revive terrorism in Punjab? Why do American think tanks repeatedly state that Pakistan is the most dangerous place in the world? What does India gain from giving away Siachen?

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.


 

Friday, October 05, 2012

Illicit Collusion in Coalition


               Karan Kharb
 

In principle, a ‘coalition government’ is as democratic and constitutionally as valid as any single party majority government. On the face of it, such governments are more broad based and far more inclusive in nature.  Coalitions also seem to represent larger part of the population, enable blending of diverse ideologies, and symbolize collective identity and solidarity of the nation. The façade is so fascinating that such governments should be powerful enough to trigger a boom in prosperity, fortify security and boost up absolute harmony and satisfaction in the society – a dreamful of Ram Rajya! Far from being so soothing and rewarding, however, the present UPA Coalition Government has given the country more woes than service, prosperity or security by messing up the systemic order so badly that governance became immovably dysfunctional in a quagmire of corruption and scams that have no equal in India’s history.  Only now, freed from Mamata Banerjee’s tantrums, a relieved yet beleaguered UPA flounders to refurbish its smothered image and redeem whatever is left of its credibility by moving ahead with its professed reform plans in a do-or-die style. How far it manages to crawl before doing or dying will depend upon the not so trust worthy friends-cum-foes within and outside the coalition like Mulayam Singh’s Samajwadi Party and Mayawati’s Bahujan Samajwadi Party who have developed uncanny virtues of colliding and colluding at the same time.

               Almost all the big blow-ups of political corruption like Bofors, Jain Hawala case, Tehelka, Fodder scam and many more have ended in damp squib as we can see their beneficiaries enjoying same or more power and pelf to this day.  This phenomenon has emboldened the politicians and bureaucrats who now take big blames boldly with arrogant smirk and assured impunity. Politics has thus become a big-ticket trade to make or break governments in India. No wonder newer political parties have been mushrooming.  As many as 1112 registered unrecognised political parties, 52 state parties and 6 national parties in India were on record in 2010 as per ECI’s notification dated 17 Sep 2010. More have been added since.

In the Indian context, ‘coalition’ has emerged as illicit ‘collusion’ of mutual convenience for fulfilling narrow self interests of partners. And these partners are sometimes those parties and even individuals who otherwise would be insignificant entities. The first sin committed by the coalition partners, especially those who rush to join the pack after election results, is that they abandon their pre-poll assurances given to the electorate through their manifestos. Casting their warrior robes and arms away, they suddenly start charming those very enemies whom they had wowed to defeat and destroy just a few days ago – but only until the poll results came. They also have no qualms in abandoning their own proclaimed manifestos and agreeing to what they were bitterly opposed if they can see a carrot of substantial political and/or material benefits dangling before them. Ideologies have given way to opportunistic gaming where coalition partners stick together primarily to exploit their positions either to amass huge wealth by corrupt means or to consolidate their position in a way that would enhance their bargaining power to influence government decisions by blackmail.  We are witnessing this blatantly naked show daily in our polity today.  Historically, coalitions have consecutively retarded India’s advance and damaged our credibility abroad from time to time. 

Murky History of our Coalitions

The emergence of Janata Party and its victory in 1977 general elections was a turning point in Indian politics. In a landmark judgement in 1975, Allahabad High Court convicted Indira Gandhi debarring her from contesting elections for six years for corrupt electoral practices in her 1971 election against Raj Narain. Her machinations to vindicate her position only aided the public ire to flare up. Her popularity plummeted sharply forcing her to impose Emergency and postpone elections. Demanding her resignation, Jai Prakash Narayan launched ‘Sampoorna Kranti’ (Total Revolution), a vigorous campaign against corruption and a self-serving administration. His call received tumultuous response throughout north India. Heeding his appeal, the opposition parties merged together to form the Janata Party. Even from the ruling Congress a sizeable chunk parted along with Jagjivan Ram to join JP. Riding on the popular wave against corruption and tyranny, Janata Party won the elections and formed the government with a comfortable majority. Janata Party’s formation was viewed not as a coalition of political convenience but as a potent force united by common aims and driven by what had once appeared a cohesive leadership that had forged together in oneness after dissolving their erstwhile party based identities. India was celebrating victory of good over evil.     

However, all the public euphoria proved to be short lived as inter-personal and inter-group feuds, rivalries and ambitions started surfacing from the first day.  The fusion of the erstwhile parties and ideologies could not level up the crevices between them which deepened with warring leaders, stalwarts like Morarji Desai, Charan Singh and Jagjivan Ram, pulling it apart from the very top. Thus, the Janata Party Government that had created history by trouncing Indira Gandhi and her Congress Party for the first time ever amidst much fanfare, collapsed as a failed experiment in 1979.       

VP Singh was viewed as a towering leader in the Indian politics and even his exit from the Rajiv Gandhi Government became a momentous event.  His coalition (National Front) also crashed within 11 months in 1990.  A funny culture of strange coalitions started evolving soon giving hopes even to fractious factions of small numbers in the Parliament to form government.  Chandra Shekhar had a direct support of a Janata Dal breakaway group of just 64 MPs when he was sworn in Prime Minister with the ‘outside support’ of Congress. As was expected, the Congress pulled down this government within four months after trading malicious charges and counter charges. The country was thus again pushed to mid-term elections in 1991.  

Having failed to win majority in the 1991 general election, the fledgling Narasimha Rao Government depended upon the support of Left Front.  When faced with a no confidence motion, it survived by buying JMM support in 1993 and remained embroiled in numerous corruption scandals some of which involved the Prime Minister himself. The 1996 general election again threw up a hung Parliament. Turbulence marked the next phase of Indian politics with Atal Bihari Vajpayee having to resign within 13 days of his first tryst with the prime ministerial reality.  Coalitions also sprinkle fortunes indiscriminately and often bestow greatness upon some individuals who might never have dreamt of such profusion of grace from the Providence if the worthier had not rivalled themselves. Thus came Deve Gowda, a compromise Prime Minister, to lead a fragile coalition of the United Front that lasted barely 10 months forcing yet another pre-mature general election in 1997.

IK Gujral who succeeded Deve Gowda also failed to keep his coalition partners like Lalu Prasad Yadav and DMK, and outside supporters like Congress in good humour, thanks to fodder scam and Jain Commission’s indictment of DMK in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case. The government collapsed cutting short Gujral’s tenure of 11 months.

In our short but roller coaster history of coalitions, the NDA regime under Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee has been qualitatively a different experience.  His first stint lasted only 13 days. The next one too was cut short by Jayalalitha withdrawing her support and letting the NDA government collapse within 13 months.  Yet, it was marked with some historic events like the nuclear test, the Lahore summit and the Kargil War.

The third time, however, NDA romped home again with a comfortable majority of 303 seats in the 1999 elections. The NDA government not only completed a full five-year term under Atal Bihari Vajpayee, but was also marked by some momentous achievements like highways development projects, foreign policy shift to improve relations with Pakistan and China, and a number of economic reforms that accelerated growth at a record level of 7% in 2003.  There was, of course, a flipside of the Vajpayee government too.  Incidents like the Indian Airlines hijack, terrorist attack on the Parliament, the Tehelka scandal et al marred an otherwise progressive era of good governance. Yet, despite pulls and pressures of coalition partners and detractors galore, Vajpayee managed the coalition deftly with sagacity and statesmanship for a full tenure of five years.

Then came the Congress led UPA coalition in 2004 which is now in the midst of its second phase. In a unique departure from the established democratic norms, India has a Prime Minister who is not a directly elected representative of the people.  Manmohan Singh is undoubtedly the world’s most educated Prime Minister – and the least visible and most silent too.  Further, he is also the humblest of the valiant warrior clan he comes from. Although highly admired for high integrity and probity in public life, he survived a crucial ‘Confidence Vote’ by garnering support through dubious means amid high drama enacted in the well of the House. It is now common knowledge how currency notes flew in the well of the House in July 2008 as an evidence of cash paid to some BJP MPs through ‘couriers’ from Samajwadi Party with a view to bribing them in exchange of their vote for the government.   

An Era of Unprecedented Corruption and Misrule

No doubt, the economy grew at a record of 7% in 2007-08, but scandals and scams tarnished the image of the UPA government to such an extent that in its second term the governance itself came to a grinding halt under the ever rising sooty smoke of scams – each bigger than the previous.  What hits the UPA Coalition harder is the fact that these revelations have not come from some jealously conducted sting operations by media but from the country’s highest constitutional watchdog institution – the Comptroller Auditor General (CAG) of India. 

First, the government found it hard to proceed against A Raja and his accomplices for fear of DMK withdrawing support. In the Commonwealth Games scandal there were too many Congress heavy weights involved that the government again moved reluctantly, if not apologetically, against the culprits.  Some were just let off too. Unprecedented corruption cases involving a large number of ministers and coalition partners has virtually destroyed India’s credibility even as the flood of scams refuses to abate. Investments dried out, prices soared in the worst inflationary environment and economic growth has now nose-dived to below 6%. 

Obviously, India is under a Coalition curse. Interestingly, the coalition scenario throws open sudden opportunities for anybody and everybody to make a killing.  It is now an emerging culture that offers unusual opportunities to even those without any political identity – the independents.  What bargaining power can a couple of MPs/MLAs have on the floor of the House where the tussle is to form or fell a Government? In normal times, sweet nothing; but enormous if the House is evenly balanced or the majority group’s edge is very thin in number. Madhu Koda, an independent MLA then, went on to become Chief Minister of Jharkhand despite being an independent.  Now an MP, he is in jail for amassing a staggering fortune of Rs 4000 crore through corrupt means. Coalition norms allow him to replicate his Jharkhand tactics in New Delhi and become India’s Prime Minister one day too soon in the given political scenario. Gopal Konda, another rags-to-riches independent MLA, also now in jail for lowly intrigues and sleazy crime, had also colluded along with a small gang of 2-3 to help Congress form the Government in Haryana for which he was rewarded with a ministerial berth.  A handful of JMM MPs had no significance in the Lok Sabha until their support was needed to save the Narasimha Rao government.  They demanded hefty amount of money and got it besides political rehabilitation they had never foreseen. Again, in 2008 a similar opportunity knocked at the doors of some sleepy MPs who were paid huge sacks full of high value currency.

Besides outright bribery, strange ways have been evolved to innovatively trade crime and corruption in exchange of political support. Otherwise, why should the CBI act in spurts moving in a blow-hot-blow-cold manner for or against politicians? The agency is being used as a domesticated hound that can be unleashed or muzzled whenever required to round up and hold the useful delinquent politicians under control.  In August 2007, the CBI proceeded to prosecute Mulyam Singh for amassing benami properties and in December 2008, it withdrew the case on the advice of Solicitor General of India for no justifiable legal reason! Similarly in Mayawati’s disproportionate assets case, the CBI soft-pedalled it to enable the apex Court to quash the proceedings against her for want of evidence which the CBI could have – and should have – provided. Ideologically or politically, there is nothing common among Mulayam, Mayawati and Sonia Gandhi or Manmohan Singh – only corruption and the danger of annoying beyond a point is holding them on the same side.  

Political thinkers in India and abroad are perplexed at the incredible history being written by the world’s largest democracy today. Here, we have a minority government (deficient by 21 MPs as of now) which is being howled and condemned by all – within its own ranks and those out of it. It has been badly stuck in an ever-expanding quagmire of scams, unable to run a Parliamentary session or push through any major policy decision. Entire country is angry at it as can be seem from the masses that readily rally behind any call against the Government which has now become a synonym for corruption and misrule. What a wonder it is that with all political parties, media, people crying in chorus against it and even the judiciary and constitutional authorities indicting it for so many wrongs, a minority government in India is not collapsing. This is the power of illicit collusion! Innovative stratagems are so deftly designed that it would be hard to tell a friend from a foe in this nexus. While everyone seems to be shooting at the government, not all shooters are its enemies. There are many in shooters’ garb who are just burning crackers, firing only blank or smoke – no lethal ammunition. Those who vociferously criticise the JUPA Government and vehemently oppose its policies outside the Parliament, are actually the guarantors of its continuity – Samajwadi Party, for instance. And we, the gullible voters, thought our elected representatives were fighting to safeguard our interests in the Parliament.

Rise India, rise – Arrest the Decline Now!       

Drastic reforms are needed urgently but how can reforms come in when the very mechanism of introducing reforms has become defunct or hostile to the idea? We are approaching the next general election which is due in 2014 or, there is every probability, may be even earlier.  In our own interest and that of our children’s, we all need to initiate effort to remove the malady and reform the system. The next election too might throw up a hung parliament at the Centre and hung assemblies in the states.  Initiation of early reforms can commence even now if enough public opinion builds around these ideas:-

(a)    Public aversion to crime and corruption must become actively visible and loud enough to force the political parties to avoid fielding tainted candidates in the elections.

(b)    Judiciary must take suo motu cognizance of criminal cases pending against occupants of public offices including ministers, MPs, MLAs and others and order speedy time bound trials by fast track courts. During the pendency of the cases, they must remain suspended from their positions and re-instated only after being fully absolved by the court.

(c)    Pre-poll pacts among parties have the sanction of people who voted them as partners in that Alliance. Therefore, they cannot break away and switch sides midway as TMC and RLD have done in the current Parliament. If they do, they must first resign and seek fresh mandate of the people in a snap poll with the countdown for their mid-term election commencing from the day they resigned or withdrew from the Coalition.      

(d)    In the event of there being a hung Parliament or state Assembly, the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister should be elected by the elected MPs/MLAs on the floor of the House.

(e)    Finally, there should be fixed tenures of all Legislatures including the Lok Sabha.  It shall discourage blackmailing tactics of the detracting forces and also the opportunistic rush of the ruling clique to encash their momentary popularity on certain occasions. Besides, fixed tenures will also save huge national wealth that is wasted in repetitive mid-term polls forced upon the nation by whims and fancies of a few individuals.   Centre for Media Studies (CMS) survey reports put the overall expenditure of India’s last general election (2009) at a staggering Rs 10,000 crore.