Harsha Kakar
I had written twice on OROP in this column prior to the release of the government order. Today I highlight the impact the government order is likely to have on the ongoing agitation.
One of the basic principles which differentiate the military from the corporate is selection of goals and objectives. In the corporate,they are decided by mutual consent, whereas in the military, there are no options. The objective is determined based on a strategic aim that has to be achieved, irrespective of cost. If success eludes, then options to re-launch are undertaken. In simple terms, there are no runners-up in war. The country cannot afford one.
Thus within the military there are no grounds for bargaining, no grounds for discussion and most important there are no grounds to question. Therefore haggling or coming to a mid- way point after endless rounds of discussions,as is politicallydone,is something the military never teaches. The words of Lord Tennyson in the ‘Charge of the Light Brigade’ are apt “Theirs not to make reply, theirs not to question why, theirs but to do and die.” Further the soldier has never learnt to surrender, but fight to the end.
The veteran, who has served the nation under difficult conditions expected the government to honour in complete what the national parliament had passed and the government of India had agreed to fulfil, but did not. The defence minister stating that the objecting veterans are not behaving like soldiers is wrong, as soldiers never haggle and never surrender. While in service he has done what was expected of him, irrespective of cost to life or limb, now expected the same from his Government.
The statement,which also went on to add, that everybody has the right to demand, but not all demands can be fulfilled,cut no ice with the agitators. They did not demand anything; they only desired that they be given what the elected parliament had approved, nothing more and nothing less. The movement was apolitical and therefore gained national support. The country felt shamed when veterans of various wars stood in protest demanding what was theirs rightfully and were roughed up by the police.
The protestors have vowed to continue with their agitation. The quiet and forceful manner, in which the agitation is being conducted, is a lesson for all who witness it. It is particularly apt for our parliamentarians, who next week would be back, displaying the same unruly and irresponsible behaviour as they did during the last session. The defence minister’s words that the leaders prove the movement is apolitical is again biased. A serving soldier has to be apolitical, not the veteran. Many veterans including an ex- chief are now political representatives in the government. Hence why should it remain apolitical? If people want to support the agitation, they should, as long as they do not ask veterans to join a particular political outfit.
The national scenario is changing. The Bihar election has proved the vulnerability of the government. The opposition is confident of stopping the BJP juggernaut. Political leaders are now supporting the movement. The Congress started;Kejriwal followed.
The Government compelled the media to blackout the mass rallyon OROPconducted in Delhi in Sept. Could it repeat the same when the movement goes national and gets support from states not controlled by the ruling party? Could it repeat the same even in Delhi when the next rally is held and attended by leaders cutting across party lines?
The Government action of diluting the demand has brought in frustration and anger within the veteran community. The most prized possession of any serving soldier or veteran is his tally of medals which he proudly displays on his chest on ceremonial occasions. These are indicative of the rigours of service which he has undergone, battles and operations he has participated in and the recognition by the nation of his service. A soldier would never part with his medals which form the fondest memories of a life lived hard.
If he decides to part, then it is due to frustration, disappointment and anger. By returning them, he parts with his heart and soul and conveys to the government his lack of faith and trust on the political leadership. It is not being anti-national, as the defence minister said, but being extremely frustrated and disappointed. It carries more heartfelt feelings than the recent return of awards by a collection of artists on the issue of intolerance.
The most enduring impact is the effect on the serving soldier. A serving soldier of today is a veteran of tomorrow. He is aware that without options for a second career he would have to survive only on his pension and with enhanced responsibilities. If this continues to be meagre then future survival would be a battle. Therefore he would need to keep his life and limbs safe and soundand not worry about the medals which the country gives. Hencehe may decide tocontinue to serve like any other government employee, with minimum risk.
The agitation would continue to grow in the coming days, in spite of criticism from a section of veterans. Political support would flow, making the movement partially politicised. The veterans could also move the Supreme Court to force government action.
On 16 December the country celebrates Vijay Diwas, marking victory in the 1971 war.While the government lays the formal wreath at India gate, the veterans would have their own memorial service led by those who actually fought and in honour of their comrades who lost their lives and whose widows survive in penury on meagre pensions. With media coverage the Government would definitely be embarrassed.
It is now upto the Government to take action to conclude this battle at the earliest and amend the notification. A lingering battle would only cause more harm and damage to the Government, the soldier and the nation.
(The author is a retired Major General of the Indian Army)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel