Lt General Bhopinder Singh (Retd)
Primetime newhours on the TV are peppered with repeated allusions to the Indian Defence Forces, from invoking the ‘soldier’ on legitimate issues like the Indo-Pakistan impasse, to the utterly disconnected issues like demonitisation and standing on the national anthem in cinemas. Convenient propping of the symbolic Indian ‘soldier’ to injecthyper-nationalism is underway with military precision by the accompanying retinue of the latest ‘newsroom warriors’ – theVeterans in resplendent military regalia, creating political ‘no-fly-zones’ to guarantee the nationalistic high ground for the political parties. This is new medium and phenomenon for the essentially ‘barrackised’ soldiers, who are more attuned to the relative-isolation from the political mainstream, ensconced in either the ‘forward areas’ or the picket-fenced cantonments.
Part-historical and part-deliberate, the institution of the Armed Forces have evolved their own governance, ethos and values that have withstood the parallel degradation of most other Governmental agencies. It has its own laws, redressal and operational systems that have ensured that the efficacy of the sword arm is maintained from the frozen,minus 50 degrees of the Siachen glacier, to the infernos of plus 50 degrees of the Thar Desert. The systems are not perfect and are susceptible to aberrations and derelictions like Adarsh scam, Tehelka sting, Tatra Trucks amongst many others – however, the proverbial bad apples are a still a minority that is incomparable to any other Governmental body. However, it does have a brewing angst and ire that is dangerously glossed over e.g. OROP, successive pay commissions etc., a testimony to the price that befalls any disciplined institution that delivers more than mandated, and yet remains ‘voiceless’, by design, choice and good reason.
The frustration of ‘voicelessness’ first burst forth in the OROP saga that sadly continues with the emotional and financial humiliation of the fraternity playing out on the footpaths of Janpath. OROP struggle was a political in its inception as it presupposed, that all political parties had contributed to the regression of the Indian Armed Forces, notwithstanding the condescending invocation of the ‘Indian Soldier’. Sadly, the TV’s lost interest in the technicalities of OROP and the civil bureaucracy managed to kick one more in, when the 7th Pay Commission perpetuated the ‘secondement’,and disallowed the promised parity.
OROP movement is symptomatic of the institutional discipline, that is oddly enough, abused and ignored, as the dual reality of tanks parading down the Rajpath on the Republic Day is juxtaposed with the specter of aging warhorses with rusting medals sitting silently across the road in Janpath, unable to comprehend the indignity of’jumlas’. Apathy breeds division and the Governmental procrastination almost succeeded in creating an hitherto unprecedented and explosive divide – a few meters away from the principal OROP movement tent was an alternative OROPprotest that was ostensibly protecting the rights of ‘other ranks’, as the principal movement was unfairly projected as propagating the issues of officers, only. The first fissures of internal divide surfaced. This owes its genesis to the governmental twiddling-of-thumb, and risking the sacred covenant between the officer and the soldier. Like all divided protests, OROP totality was essentially lost despite the institution exemplifying the living by the sword in Pathankot’s, Pampore’s and various other natural disasters that elicited jingoistic fervor for a few days, before settling down to concerted apathy.
OROP was primetime TV baptism for veterans, and soon, many joined the varied debates and propounded the blunt military angularities – unquestionable in import,and with the running risk of sounding ‘anti-national’, should a less kinetic option be suggested. The political appropriation and showcasing of these veterans was irresistible, as they offered the plausible justifications and ‘cover-fire’ for muscular posturing of the executive. Except, this pawned overreach led to veterans joining the ‘shouting brigades’ and navigating debates to convenient political positions. This tactic was fraught with inherent risk, as initially the conversations were essentially outwardly and therefore even the extreme solutions like, ‘let us raise our own fidayeens’ was given the long rope. The cookie crumbled when the dispassionate TV channels picked up a story of disgruntled soldiers on social media to milk for primetime TRP’s – for once the Veterans were forced to stare at their own navels and get caught in the line of fire of TV sensationalism. The no-holds barred platform of the TV newsroom pitted officers versus the ‘other ranks’and watched them squirm with glee, TRP’s were guaranteed and the institutional sensitivities and implications be damned!
The construct, history and conditions of the Armed Forces are so contextually complex that to make immediate sense of the situational status is impossible, and to twist the same, extremely possible. The viral of the BSF jawan, to the CRPF jawan, to finally the Army jawan, was almost expected given the immediacy of chain-reactions of the medium. Again, this is not to suggest that there are no lapses or issues warranting redressal and review, however this act and means tantamount to portents of unimaginable disciplinary consequences, and it belies the reality of the multiple redressal systems that exist within the Armed Forces. General Rawat was spot on to call the bluff of sensationalism and insist of raising the valid concerns in the appropriate form and forum – frankly, given the overall governmental apathy, the institution would not be able to deliver a Kargil, a surgical strike or continue winning in the most hostile and inhuman combat conditions, butfor the exceptional internal leadership and redressal systems that exist and keep the chin up, across board. The systems in the Forces work better than anywhere else.
The Veterans have paid a price for their own naivety – from politicians to the TV studios, the fraternity reposed its faith and found itself stuck in the quagmire of selective usage. Recently, the apolitical voice of the Armed Forces acquired a deeply political overtone with the willful allowing of the ‘soldier’, in almost all sundry political posturing. The continuing slide of the Armed Forces is a legacy reality that needs a voice in unison, stripped of all political colours and loyalties, when it is about the institution itself.Veterans must engage carefully avoiding the political usurpation of the ‘soldier’ and avoid minefields of divide, that come from ignorance of the institutional functioning- as the politicians and TV studios are only driven by ratings, political or viewership, fickle either ways.
(The author is former Lt Governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands & Puducherry)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel