Harsha Kakar
The questioning of the validity of the successful surgical strike across the LOC, by politicians, some security experts and the media, opened a debate on whether the military can be challenged on its public statements. The present case pertainsto seeking proof,on operational actions,against a hostile nation,as opposed to normal administrative military issues. The army rightly refused to be drawn into the controversy, leaving it to politicians and supportive media to battle it out. Simultaneously, retired military officers on television channels, strongly refuted claims of proof, stating this would compromise national security. The surgical strike made the nation proud of its army, with celebrations breaking out in every corner of the land, since it was the first time, that such a strike was launched. It built confidence in the public, that India can and will respond to future threats. Pakistan as expected, denied the attack. It has been weeks since the strike, however, the controversy surrounding it, refuses to die down.
The reason which compels rival politicians and their supportive media representatives to seek proof,is the advantage the ruling party is drawing from these strikes, especially when elections in crucial states are around the bend.Vote bank politics in India enablespoliticiansto belittle any institution or individual. Logically, the ruling party should claim credit, as it took the decision, knowing well, that had there been casualties or at worst a failure, they would have faced the music from a combined opposition.
The announcement when it was made, came as a simple statement read by the DGMO, who subsequently refused to answer questions. This announcement took the nation by surprise. With passage of time, as the political climate grew hotter, questions began being raised on the veracity of the statement. Scepticseven went to claim, that since the army was tight lipped and refused to provide proof, it appeared that the news was fabricated. The army only passed subtle comments, stating it had in its possession a video of the operation, release of which was the Government’s prerogative. The Government rightly refused to allow its release. The political temperature grew to such a level that the Parliamentary Standing Committee insisted that it be briefed on the details of the strike, to which the Government relented. As per reports, no questions on the actual conduct were accepted. A similar briefing was also held for a multi-party delegation, which had leaders of most opposition parties. The aim was to brief select political leaders to curb the doubting Thomas’s and isolate those who seek to discredit the army. Yet, the debate continues unabated.
Realistically, can the military be questioned on its claims? Those supporting the case quote comments from the US supreme court, as also instances where the US military hid serious incidents, like the infamous My Lai massacre in Vietnam, until it was made public by the media. India as a democratic nation, has the military as one of its pillars of national power. While every Government department is open to questioning and criticism, is the military different? Amongst all the Central Government services, this is the only one which has remained away from media glare. Even at the height of the OROP agitation, when the military top brass was being severely criticized, it refused to be drawn into any controversy. It has always done its assigned task, albeit quietly, irrespective of the internal political climate. Further, military operations come within the gambit of national security, details of which are not openly meant to be divulged, as they could impact future operations as also endanger human lives. The strike in question may not have been launched in depth, however, was aimed at conveying a strong message on Indian intentions and policy change.
Within Pakistan, the strike conveyed to those who control power that India would no longer follow its policy of strategic restraint, but henceforth pursue offensive defence. The strikes have changed the equation between the civil and military power centres. Officially their Government can never admit to such an action on their soil, especially as it considers its military superior, ‘one equal to ten’. If it was unwilling to even accept the bodies of its soldiers’ post Kargil, the terrorists killed are, but cannon fodder. In such strikes, it is not the number of casualties which matter, as bodies are never counted, but a successful conduct of the operation. Therefore, questioning of minute details including exact quantum of casualties, mean nothing, except the ignorance of those asking.
The press conference by the DGMO was also aimed for the international audience. It conveyed to the world, that India would no longer be willing to accept Pakistan’s misadventures without paying back. In fact, while India briefed select envoys on the successful conduct, Pakistan dedicated its foreign service to employ every means to deny it. Ultimately, Pakistan helped India in proving its successful conduct, yet not convincing our local critics. An article in the online magazine ‘The Wire,’ even suggested that the army should release data which Pakistan knew. Such doubts do not justify the confidence of a nationof its ultimate source of power, the military.
Questioning the military on administrative matters is separate from operational issues. In such cases, the media has raised issues on numerous occasions, including bursting the bubble on various scams. While the military brass has not responded, bowing to the tradition of being away from the limelight, leaving it to the Defence Minister to reply on their behalf. The reason for keeping the military away from the limelight is to restrict its popularity at the national level, a situation Pakistan faces today, where the army chief is more revered than the civilian Government. Even when it supports the civil Government in aid to civil authorities, it attends press conferences with members of other Government agencies and shares basic details, leaving most of the justification to Government spokespersons. Rarely does it claim credit for its actions.
Never has the Indian military lied to its populace, especially on matters concerning operational situations. It never has a reason to. For the doubting Thomas’s, please trust this final bastion of national power, at least where operational issues are concerned. If it does not provide details, it is because it involves national security and could jeopardise future operations and lives, not for any other reason.It can continue to be questioned on administrative matters, which do not impact national security.
(The author is a retired Major General of the Indian Army)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Follow our WhatsApp channel