In this photograph released by the Indian Army on January 27, 2017, soldiers are pictured during a rescue operation to find soldiers trapped at the site of a snow avalanche in Gurez sector, some 130 km north of Srinagar. AFP file photo

Tribune News Service

Srinagar, January 30

Three days after being pulled out alive from snow following a cave-in along the Line of Control (LoC) in the Machil sector, five Army men today succumbed to their injuries at an Army hospital in Srinagar, taking the solders’ toll in last week’s snowstorm to 20.The five were airlifted from the Machil sector in north Kashmir’s frontier Kupwara district early Saturday morning, but succumbed soon after they were evacuated in Mi-17 helicopters to Army’s 92 Base Hospital in Srinagar today.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)The five, belonging to 56 Battalion of Rashtriya Rifles, were shifted to a local unit for medical treatment after being rescued on Saturday. They were unconscious at the time of rescue and needed immediate specialist treatment, but could not be evacuated to Srinagar for over 36 hours. The soldiers may have died due to hypothermia, said sources. “Postmortem will determine the cause of death,” a source said.Over the past one week, Kashmir’s weather has claimed 26 lives. Of these, 20 are from the Army — 15 men, including an officer, were killed in avalanches in Gurez sector in north Kashmir and Sonamarg in central Kashmir.

Machil tragedy victims

• From Maharashtra :Sepoy Dhavale Ganesh Kisan;Sepoy Ambore Balaji Bhagwanrao; Naik Mane Ramchandra Shamrao
• From Tamil Nadu :Grenadier Thamothara Kannan M
• From Gujarat :Signalman Parmar Deva

Tribune News Service

Guwahati, January 22

Two jawans of the Assam Rifles were killed and three others injured when militants belonging to the banned ULFA (Independent) and Corcom today ambushed a convoy near Jagun in Tinsukia district of Assam. Security forces also killed two militants in retaliatory fire.The slain security personnel were identified as Riflemen Ben Naitha and K Wangshu. The militants also snatched weapons, including an AK-47 rifle, from the jawans. “A road-opening party of the Assam Rifles came under an attack on the national highway near Jagun around 7.30 am, leading to death of two security personnel. Troops killed two CorCom militants in retaliation,” Assam Police’s Additional Director General (Special Branch) Pallab Bhattacharyya said.

Suresh Dharur

Tribune News Service

Hyderabad, January 17

Billed as a first of its kind initiative in the country for the welfare of Armed Forces personnel, the Telangana government on Tuesday announced setting up of an Army Welfare Fund for the benefit of families of serving, retired and martyred soldiers.Making a statement in the Assembly, Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao unveiled a slew of measures, including constitution of the Rs 80 crore Army Welfare Fund, massive increase in cash rewards to Army personnel from the state winning gallantry medals and a host of other concessions.The Chief Minister said that he and his Cabinet colleagues would make an annual contribution of Rs 25,000 each towards the fund while legislators from the state would contribute Rs 10,000 each.Army personnel from the state winning Param Vir Chakra and Ashok Chakra will get Rs 2.25 crore (Punjab pays the highest at Rs 2 crore), Mahavir Chakra and Kirti Chakra Rs 1.25 crore (Punjab Rs 1 crore).

Scorpene class submarine Khanderi launched at Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL) in Mumbai on Thursday. PTI photo

Mumbai, January 12

Khanderi, the second Scorpene-class submarine that has superior stealth and the ability to launch a crippling attack with torpedoes as well as tube-launched anti-ship missiles whilst underwater or on surface, was on Thursday launched at the Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL) here.Union Minister of State for Defence Subhash Bhamre presided over the function to initiate the launch of Khanderi (Yard 11876). The submarine was launched by the Union minister;s wife, Bina Bhamre.

(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)

Chief of the Naval Staff Admiral Sunil Lanba was also present on the occasion when the submarine was separated from the pontoon on which it was assembled.The state-of-the-art features of the submarine include superior stealth and the ability to launch a crippling attack on the enemy using precision guided weapon.The attack can be launched with torpedoes, as well as tube-launched anti-ship missiles, whilst underwater or on surface. The stealth features will give it the invulnerability unmatched by many submarines.The submarine is designed to operate in all theatres, including the tropics. All means and communications are provided to ensure interoperability with other components of a Naval task force.It can undertake multifarious types of missions typically undertaken by any modern submarine, that is, anti-surface warfare, anti-submarine warfare, intelligence gathering, mine-laying, area surveillance, etc.Khanderi is the second of the six submarines being built at MDL in collaboration with M/s DCNS of France, as part of Project 75 of Indian Navy. The first one, Kalvari, was completing sea trials and would be commissioned shortly into the Indian Navy, a defence official said.The Indian Navy’s submarine arm will complete 50 years on December 8 this year.The Submarine Day is celebrated every year to commemorate the birth of the submarine arm with induction of the first submarine, erstwhile INS Kalvari, into the Indian Navy on December 8, 1967, it said.India joined the exclusive group of submarine constructing nations on February 7, 1992, with the commissioning of the first Indian-built submarine, INS Shalki.The MDL built this submarine and went on to commission another submarine, INS Shankul, on May 28, 1994. These submarines are still in service.Khanderi is named after the Island fort of Maratha forces, which played a vital role in ensuring their supremacy at sea in the late 17th century. Khanderi is also the name for Tiger Shark, an MDL official said.The submarine is built according to the principle of modular construction, which involves dividing the submarine into a number of sections and outfitting them concurrently.The equipment is mounted in a special manner and then embarked into the sections. The complexity of the task increases exponentially as it involves laying kilometres of cabling and piping in extremely congested compartments.All equipment has been installed in the submarine, with 95 per cent cabling and piping also being completed.Pressure-testing, setting-to-work and commissioning of various systems of the submarine is currently in progress, and would continue after the launching of the submarine.The important safety milestone of vacuum-testing was completed in the first attempt itself, and within a single day on January 5.This matched the record of ‘Kalvari’, which also completed the vacuum test in one go.Till December, the submarine will undergo rigorous trials and tests, both in harbour and at sea, while on surface and whilst dived.These trials are designed to test each system to its fullest capacity. Thereafter, it would to be commissioned into the Indian Navy as INS Khanderi.This would be preceded by the commissioning of Kalvari later this year. The other four submarines will follow in the wake of Khanderi at intervals of nine months.As per tradition, ships and submarines of the Navy are brought alive again after decommissioning. The first Khanderi was commissioned into the Navy on December 6, 1968 and decommissioned on October 18, 1989. PTI

Islamabad, January 6

Pakistan has provided UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres details of Indian “terrorism and interference” in the country, its foreign office said in a statement on Friday.  Pakistani Prime Minister’s Adviser on Foreign Affairs, Sartaj Aziz, said the country’s Pakistan’s envoy to the United Nations Maleeha Lodhi met the new UN secretary general to hand over a dossier.”The dossier contains additional information and proof of Indian/RAW interference in Pakistan and involvement in terrorism particularly in Balochistan, FATA and Karachi. This is a follow up to the three dossiers, which were shared with the United Nations in October 2015,” the Foreign Office said in a statement.In a covering letter sent, Aziz claimed that the arrest of “Indian RAW agent Kulbhushan Jadhav from Balochistan and his confessional statement admitting involvement in activities aimed at destabilising Pakistan, and support to terrorist elements vindicated Pakistan’s long-standing position about India’s involvement in such activities”.Jadhav has been accused by Pakistan of planning “subversive activities” in the country. India has acknowledged that Jadhav had served in the navy but said he was not connected to the government.Aziz also said India’s “hostile intentions” could be drawn from recent statement by its political and military leadership, as he asked the UN to “restrain India from activities that were in clear violation of international law and threatened regional and international peace and security”.”Pakistan continues to desire peace with all its neighbours including India. It is convinced that the common objectives of economic development and prosperity for our people can best be promoted through regional cooperation, conflict resolution and peaceful settlement of disputes,” the Foreign Office statement said.”At the same time, however, Pakistan will resolutely defend its territorial integrity and take all necessary measures to counter any threat to its security,” it said. — PTI

People eat food inside a restaurant in Gurgaon. — File photo

Chandigarh, January 2

If consumers are not satisfied with service at a hotel or a restaurant, they can have the service charge waived, the Central government said on Monday.As per the Department of Consumer Affairs, a number of complaints from consumers have been received that hotels and restaurants are following the practice of charging ‘service charge’ in the range of 5-20%, in lieu of tips, which a consumer is forced to pay irrespective of the kind of service provided to him.

(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)

After the government sought a clarification, the Hotel Association of India replied that the service charge is completely discretionary and should a customer be dissatisfied with the dining experience he/she can have it waived off. Therefore, it is deemed to be accepted voluntarily.

The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, provides that a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or the supply of any goods or for the provision of any service, adopts any unfair method or deceptive practice, is to be treated as an unfair trade practice and that a consumer can make a complaint to the appropriate consumer forum established under the Act against such unfair trade practices, a release issued by the Department of Consumer Affairs said.The department has also asked the state governments to sensitise the companies, hotels and restaurants in the states regarding aforementioned provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.The states have also been asked to advise hotels and restaurants to disseminate information through display at the appropriate place that the ‘service charges’ are voluntary and a consumer dissatisfied with the services can have it waived off. — TNS

When a Chief assumes office through ‘deep selection’ and superseding ‘equals’, he must stand by his better military judgement and follow his conscience to remain prepared to even resign, if need be.

Army Chief-designate Lt General Bipin Rawat paying homage to the martyrs of the 1971 India-Pakistan war. PIB file photo

George Orwell was born in India in 1903, to British parents. As was the practice in those times, he was banished to spend most of his childhood and adolescent years in England; schooling at the exclusive Eton College, followed by graduation from Christchurch College, in Cambridge University. Again, as was the “done thing” for such well born and aspiring young men, he qualified for entrance to the Indian Civil Service (ICS) and was appointed to the Imperial Police cadre, to serve in Burma.By all counts, George Orwell was a distinguished police officer but he had made a poor choice of profession as he was intellectually inclined, or rather driven, for seeking equitable social opportunities for the teeming economically poorer segments of human society. He espoused his dream brilliantly through the book Animal Farm, which after numerous rejections was ultimately published in early 1945.As may be imagined, the characters of the book are essentially pigs, horses, et al, who are harnessed to toil at the Manor Farm for their human master, Mr Jones. And one fine day, all animals assemble and in a kind of coup take over the farm to usher in Utopia, and adopt seven commandments, the most important being: All animals are equal, and whatever goes on two legs is an enemy.However, George Orwell had witnessed how the principle of equality was soon turned into dictatorial tyranny by Stalin in the USSR. So the utopian philosophy in Animal Farm is modified by the leader of animals to read: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”. Now it may be tad oversimplification of what in the armed forces today goes as the system of “Selection Grade Promotions”, but in essence that is what it is.There are very well-honed step-by-step merit-evaluation checks applied at multiple levels of the screening process on all aspirants for the next elevation in rank. It would be hard to fault the system per se, particularly as it also provides opportunity for redress by those who may deem it rightful.Having said all this, let me go back to the mid-1950s for the selection of the successor to General SM Shrinagesh. As this has been brought to my notice by a friend, retired Maj General PK Mallick, by quoting from the book, Leadership in the Indian Army: Biographies of Twelve Soldiers, by Maj General V K Singh of the Corps of Signals published by SAGE Publications, 2005; I find it most appropriate for all Indian citizens to be better informed:“In May 1955, Thimayya was appointed GOC-in-C, Southern Command. His tenure was uneventful, except for an attempt by Pakistan to infiltrate in the Chad Bet region of the Rajasthan desert, which was effectively dealt with by a motorised battalion. In September 1956 he moved to the Eastern Command, thus becoming the first officer to command all three field armies in India. In the Eastern Command he had to deal with insurgency by the Naga tribes, in North-East India. At that time, General S.M. Shrinagesh was the Chief of Army Staff. He was due to retire in May 1957, and there were several contenders for the post. Lieut Generals Sant Singh and Kalwant Singh were from the same Sandhurst batch, having passed out on 29 January 1925. The other two were Thimayya and PN Thapar, who had also passed out from Sandhurst together, on 4 February 1926. Thimayya had been placed 15th in order of merit (Sic. at Sandhurst), while Thapar was 18th. Hence, he was technically senior to Thapar. However, the most important factor was Thimayya’s impressive war record — he had won the DSO, and was the only Indian to have commanded a brigade in battle. The others did not have any notable achievement to their credit. As expected, Thimayya was selected for the top job in the Army, and on 8 May 1957, he was promoted to General, and took over as Chief of Army Staff. He superseded Lieut General Sant Singh, who resigned, as well as Lieut General Kalwant Singh, who decided to continue….”What is not stated about General KS Thimayya and what additionally may have singled him out in the “deep selection” process is that he was in command of Siri Division (later 19 Infantry Division), which oversaw practically all operations to include the capture of Zozi La on November 1, 1948, personally led the first Dakota landing at Leh (an improvised landing strip) on May 24, 1948, and the liberation of Ladakh right up to the Karakoram Pass!Subsequently, after two years of stalemate at the UN General Assembly, when it was finally agreed to set up the Neutral Nations Repatriation Commission, Maj General Thimayya became its Chairman on July 27, 1953, and his delicate and impartial handling of the acrimony was universally applauded. It was to his credit that North Korea amicably accepted 70,183 of their prisoners of war.I had less than two years’ service at the time, but I recall that General Thimayya as the Chief was the toast of the entire Army. And with his vast experience of war from up front, he was believed not to favour “showing the flag” posts deployed in Ladakh and along the McMahon Line in the East. In terms of numbers, fire power and logistic access, these posts were a “push over” for the better placed Chinese.General Thimayya’s war wisdom and political astuteness proved correct. Sometime in August-September 1959, the Chinese in a short and swift move inflicted heavy loses to our isolated post at Longju, in the Siang Valley close to where the Brahmaputra river descends into India. Another post at Machuka was so terribly isolated that our troops chose to abandon it when challenged by the Chinese. Admittedly, that was a disgraceful soldierly conduct but that is how it ended.These foregone defeats imposed on the military against the better judgement of their Chief, and Defence Minister Krishna Menon’s inability to engage the Army Chief in a meaningful discussion, was the fundamental reason that drove General Thimayya to tender his resignation. Far worse was to follow when Prime Minister Nehru persuaded the Chief to retract his resignation and in the next breath, berated him in the Lok Sabha.So when a Chief assumes office through deep selection and superseding two “equals”, he must stand by his better military judgement and follow his conscience to even resign, if need be.And lastly, when General KM Cariappa became the first Indian Chief on January 15, 1949, he had followed the age-old tradition, that is, the incumbent Chief demits office at the stroke of midday and the Chief-designate quietly walking into his office the following morning. And performs his first duty to his Army by way of the “Special Order of the Day”, which basically is a motivational epistle focused on upholding the oath of fidelity, come what may. Of late, an unsavoury deviation has crept in, that is, the Chief-designate walks into the office accompanied by his wife, where they are received by the incumbent Chief together with his spouse. This does not go well with the dignity of that exalted office.

A civilian government’s prerogative to make appointments must be respected without a doubt. However, it is mandatory that it exercises judgement based solely on merit — without prejudice, lobbying or parochial considerations.

Lt Gen Bipin Rawat

IT is a convention rather than a statutory requirement for the senior-most lieutenant general to be appointed as a Service Chief. Thus, the government has not committed any illegal act by appointing Lt General Bipin Rawat as the country’s 27th Army Chief after superseding two lieutenant generals. On the contrary, it has exercised its prerogative in a democracy where civilian supremacy over the armed forces is paramount. Yet, the decision has evoked much criticism among sections of retired Army officers who have attributed it to “political interference”, described it as a “bad precedent” and even predicted “the beginning of the end of an apolitical Army”. The government has defended the decision to appoint Lt General Rawat as the Army Chief by explaining the rationale in a generalised and generic expressions of he being “best suited” to deal with “emerging challenges, including a reorganised and restructured military force in the north (China), continuing terrorism and proxy war from the west (Pakistan) and the situation in the North- East.” The government has also highlighted Lt General Rawat’s operational experience as an Infantry officer in counter-insurgency (CI) operations in Jammu and Kashmir and the north-eastern states and also along both the Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir and Line of Actual Control (LAC) with Chinese-occupied Aksai Chin.This explanation sounds reasonable when viewed in isolation but not necessarily when seen in a larger framework. The senior-most superseded officer, Lt General Praveen Bakshi, is currently heading the critical Eastern Command which is entrusted with defending India’s borders with three countries – China, Myanmar and Bangladesh and also the territorial integrity of Bhutan. It is also entrusted with counter-insurgency operations in the north-eastern states. If he is considered “less experienced”, then how did Lt General Bakshi, an armoured corps officer, be assigned to head the Eastern Command which in 1971 spearheaded the liberation of East Pakistan in a landmark war with Pakistan? In any case, considering the security environment in the country, most officers from the Army’s three principal combat Arms — Infantry, Artillery and Armoured Corps — have had exposure to either or both the CI and LoC / LAC environment in some form or the other. For example, officers from the armoured corps and the artillery are known to serve in Rashtriya Rifles units that are tasked specifically with CI operations.Will all future Army Chiefs from now on be required to be from the infantry with operational experience in Jammu and Kashmir, is one of the many questions that the announcement raises. This is not about discussing the merits or demerits of Lt Generals Rawat and Bakshi. Their names are incidental. Rather, the limited point here is that both these officers rose to become Army Commanders after obtaining equivalent experience during their career. There is little to suggest that one is more outstanding than the other. With both officers at par, should not the seniority convention have prevailed so as to keep the armed forces away from needless controversy? As it is civil-military relations have of late come under considerable stress with the government mishandling the One Rank One Pension issue; doing little to address the anomalies of the Seventh Pay Commission,; downgrading mid-ranking military officers vis-a-vis their civilians counterparts in the Ministry of Defence;milking the retaliatory strikes across the Line of Controlfor political capital and, more recently, announcing the next Army and Air Force chief barely a fortnight prior. There is nothing wrong in making a “deep selection” to appoint a highly capable officer as the Service Chief or a regional commander. Currently, all professional parameters being satisfactory, an officer’s seniority (date of birth and date of commission) determines his appointment to top positions. Aware of their standing in the service list many, if not most, Service officers are known to take the careerist route and play safe. This does not always result in the best officer getting promotions and being assigned pivotal posts. As such there is need for the armed forces, particularly the Army, to seriously review its deteriorated internal health which includes the quality of leadership, politics and vendetta among the higher ranks, the subjective system of annual confidential reports that has led to considerable litigation and financial, moral and professional corruption. A larger challenge is from the political executive of the day. Considering the nature of petty, partisan and corrupt politics prevalent in the country and how politicians are used to blatantly interfering with appointments of civilian bureaucrats and policemen, the credibility of the Indian politician is at a constant low. While many politicians in India may otherwise treat the armed forces with awe, barring some individuals they take little interest in understanding the armed forces in particular and national security in general. National security is not the exclusive preserve of the armed forces; it is multi-faceted and complex requiring serious study and understanding by the political executive which takes all final decision. Hence, if ‘deep selection’ is to henceforth become a norm in selecting Service chiefs, the government will have to devise a criteria. While a civilian government’s prerogative to make appointments must be respected, it is mandatory that it exercises judgement based solely on merit without prejudice, lobbying or parochial considerations. Political meddling with a potent and monolithic organisation like the army has the potential for inducing political ambition in its leadership. The country can do without politicians trying to use an Army headed by “deep selected” pliable generals to exert influence. Surely that will mark the end to India’s professional and apolitical instrument of last resort in a country where governance continues to be marked by political and administrative mismanagement even as security threats abound.

dkumar@tribunemail.com

At the outset, Lt. Gen. Bipin Rawat must be congratulated upon being appointed as the next Chief of the Army Staff. His rich experience, exposure and hoary regimental traditions will stand him in good stead as he assumes the mantle.

Lt. Gen. Rawat’s challenges are many. The most daunting will be to unite the institution, underlining a single ethos against the diverse aspirations of soldiers. He has the potential and time to do this.

Supersession of two very competent seniors for the appointment was bound to cause anguish and evoke strong reactions — not just about the abrogation of the rightful claims and expectations of the two officers but, more importantly, on the impact it would have on the apolitical nature of the Army. To this end, the elaborate justifications put forth on the part of the establishment and certain voices from the so-called strategic community have been unhelpful, and that is worrying.

The government’s prerogative to appoint the person who it considers most suitable in these circumstances, as has been done, is unfettered. But it should have been accompanied by transparency and logic.

Ability and seniority

In a hierarchical structure such as in the Army, command authority is based on the twin planks of superior professional ability and seniority. So far, the principle of selection has been seniority-cum-merit unless there are compelling reasons to select otherwise. The selection is made from amongst serving Army Commanders and the Vice Chief of the Army Staff. The process involves filtering through over 37-38 years of national service. The basis for elevation are personal qualities, demonstrated performance and potential for next rank. Only one or two reach that position from a full-year batch. This is unlike any other system and therefore the merit factor is a given.

Against this backdrop, there are four larger issues, all rooted in the existing operational and functional ethos that the selection raises. They need to be addressed.

First, do the personal capabilities and experience of the person being selected completely overwhelm those of Lt. Gen. Praveen Bakshi and Lt. Gen. P.M. Hariz? After all, Lt. Gen. Bakshi is commander-in-chief of the Eastern Command, operationally pitted against a silent but ubiquitous Chinese threat alongside an insurgency that refuses to be quelled. He dealt with Samba and Jammu infiltration situations as a Corps Commander. For his part, Lt. Gen. Hariz has a reputation for his penchant for concepts.

Basis for evaluation

What, therefore, is the basis for a comparative evaluation and from where should it start? If it was so relevant, why was this not done earlier? Incidentally, the officers are never consulted in their growing-up years on what qualities they need to possess to become suitable to lead the institution. Therefore, how will the present set of formation commanders in peace formation, stationed for deterring war, react after hearing that all things being equal, their future aspirations can only be addressed by acquiring the experience of handling counter-insurgency operations? Or how will the officers serving in the Eastern Command react to being told that their own commander-in-chief’s experience is simply not good enough?

An officer’s career graph and experience are never of his own choosing. They follow a trajectory determined by the Military Secretary’s branch, and the officer can only accumulate experiential moss to the extent that he is allowed by the opportunities given to him. He has no choice. If the argument of not having the right experience is raised against a senior officer, to what extent is the affected officer liable for the same? Should he pay a price for being deprived of a posting that matches up to future requirements?

The second and more serious question that arises relates to the future battle space as visualised by the government and understood from the justifications of supersession. Would threats the nation faces remain static in the near term and at the ground level? If they change, then what? What if they change during the designate’s tenure?

Of late we have been talking of jointness, joint forces and joint responsibilities to attack the centre of gravity to produce desired effects. Can this ever work if the government of the day decides on a specialisation in the secondary field as the parameter for selection at the highest level? Can such a proposition ever attract talent in joint forces, which is still away from the main line of work?

Expectations of the government

The third question relates to the expectations of the government from its Army Chief. Is his role to provide overarching guidance and oversight to tactical-level operations or does he have a larger charter to prepare for battles that will hopefully never be fought? Is not all-around experience to be recognised as an attribute for selection?

And finally, to return to the principle of seniority-cum-merit that has so far stood the test of time, for a solution. The reason why the defence forces have remained apolitical so far is that this principle annulled any need to develop political patronage in spite of political control. If this continues, the days are not far when rising stars of the armed forces will seek to curry political favours both through internal and external mechanisms for ticket punching to ensure that they get their due.

Either way, the apolitical fabric stands tattered and torn.

The net impact of this unusual selection and supersession is that a narrow tactical advantage has been seized by short-changing the needs of a comprehensive all-round perspective and understanding of future wars. This needs to change and change immediately.

Anil Chait is former Chief of Integrated Defence Staff.

*SCOUT NUMBER ONE  FIRE KAHAN SE AYA*

This Army Chief controversy is getting too far for my liking. Good people being over looked, senior people being sidelined, politics entering the military arena etc appear to be dangerous trends.

I wrote yesterday, that once the decision has been taken to appoint a person it needs to be respected. Today, I want discuss the merit of the people who selected my Army Chief. Just because they happened to get some votes due to a wave in the country, are they capable enough to decide who is going to head a professional force called the Army, Navy or the Air force? Are they worthy enough to make such a selection? Are they educated enough to appoint such outstanding and professionally competent gentlemen. Are they capable enough to understand what it takes to run an disciplined organisation which is now getting political due to meddling of these dhotiwalas and babu’s unfortunately? Are the people who sat in decision to appoint them competent to judge an officer who has gone though a filtration process from a 2Lt stage? Well ladies and gentlemen, we have to appear in Part B, and D exams to start with. Leave alone Staff College and the other colleges like HDMC, LDMC, NDC etc. The Chief designates are M Phils and Doctorates in their professions and they are appointed by people who may be most uneducated but now are honourable members of our parliament. They are appointed by people who waste complete sessions of parliament in the name of democracy and at the cost of tax payer’s money. My Chief’s are appointed by people who have charges of rape, murder, loot and corruption in their names. How sad! How unfortunate! How regretful! But this is how the system goes. This is called democracy.

Please let me know the merit of our PM. Well I shall grant him this much that he rose from the grassroots, and worked hard to be a CM of a state three times. Irrespective of the state he belonged to, if he could effectively run his state, he can run the country too, so I grant him his due. Now is my question to him, does he know Kashmiri, does he understand Nagamese, can he speak Jharkhandi, the answer is no. But is he capable of taking a decision at a national level for each of our 29 states & 7 Union Territories, the answer is yes. Therefore, our Chief could be from the Armd Corps, Mech Inf, or any other arm, once you have been indoctrinated in the fire, once you have gone through your  command and staff paces, once you have been made to undergo training at the best institutions of the world, aren’t you capable of holding a baton of an Army Chief. The bureaucrats can serve the Defence ministry or the ministry of Animal husbandry and still rise to become a Chief Secretary. He is part of the selection committee which appoints the Service Chief, isn’t it a little appalling. A person who doesn’t know which side a gun fires, is capable of appointing a person who has so many guns under his command which if fired would pulverise the enemy to dust. 

Let us talk about dress the person selecting wears. Invariably he is in chappals, sandals and casuals. A person who can’t salute back properly, or acknowledge a salute at a function like launching a ship, where the Admirals are in their full finery with medals and swords, a man casually walks in without headgear and half sleeves shirt. How pathetic? How uncouth I would say. A person who may know the principles of aerodynamics being an engineer but can he fly a plane or direct fire of artillery. He may know a little what it takes to handle a large crowd because he has been a CM, but does he know how the logistics of an armed formation is worked out. Does he know how a soldier fights till the last man last round? Does he understand how that last round is supplied to the first man in the trench? Does he know the importance of a Scout who hears the first shot being fired at his patrol? Does he know fire kahan se aya? Does he understand “Dauro, leto, rengo, aar pakro, fire karo”? Does he know “chiezen kyon dikhti hain” in fact does he understand the 6S and 1M.

Believe you me all these things are not required at the level of the Army Chief, least for a defence minister? They are there to deploy nuclear weapons; to plan National Strategy. They are there to think about the future of the forces. The COAS is there to advise the Supreme Commander on what is needed to keep India safe. He is there to ask from the government what he needs to keep India safe. Does the defence minister know what is “one up” or “staggered line ahead”? Can he do any of the hand signals except rubbing his hand on his tummy to say he is hungry? Well let me not get into basics. Such esteemed gentlemen as our Chiefs have done their “mai baap parades”, “make and mend parades”, “first parade”, “halt parade” and “last parades” umpteen times. They have lived in and counted bunkers, they have marched in the hills and deserts, they have dealt with track sheds and tanks falling in blind wells,  they have led various EVC & IRG columns, they have made missile bases, they have deployed surveillance grids for formations, they have made bridge heads across DCBs and canals, they have floated in many a rivers, they have deep forded in riverine terrain, they have served in high altitude, they have para jumped, they have served in UN missions in various capacities, they have guided people fighting asymmetric warfare and they are selected by people who don’t even know what I am talking about. 

The maximum noise has been made by Rahul baba and his party spokespersons, bhaiya please pick up a “papplu” of commando wing, friends give him a four KG danda to balance it and then tell him to do his pad yatra in UP. Bhaiya ji, wear your dhoti and go to the glacier, I hope you know where it is. No no you got it wrong it is not in Switzerland, I am talking of Siachen, arey don’t confuse with Aksai Chin of Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai fame. O hell, no baba not your double chin yaar. Forget it, you won’t get it ever and you are dreaming of leading this country. Sorry to be so mean with my words, please baba leave politics, as whatever you say sounds more like a joke. People laugh at you. You have the young Scindia, Pilot, etc who can handle things far better than you. The image of your party is getting murkier more you open your mouth. You have no business to oppose the decisions of the government just to politicise them. You guys got the boot in the last elections and if you continue the way you are going you may be given the second boot too. Armed forces are a serious matter and we don’t get up at night early in the morning like you say.  We fight all day and all night till our enemy is annihilated.

The first man to contact the enemy is the scout, and if he pin points the enemy correctly, and tells his commander FIRE KAHAN SE AYA, the commander will be able to make a quick plan, deploy his support weapons, assault & defeat the enemy. Same goes for the Chiefs too, irrespective of the arm they belong to, irrespective how asymmetric the warfare is, irrespective of the swords of honours they have got or not got. All of them are far-far more capable to carry out the duty of the COAS.

I wish Gen Rawat the best again, Sir please beware. I hope you don’t fall prey to the Political fire, as no one will be able to tell you fire kahan se, kyon aur kab aya? Do you get my message hidden within these two lines, I wonder!!!!!!!!”

The government does not require the permission of 10, Janpath (Congress president Sonia Gandhi’s official residence). MUKHTAR ABBAS NAQVI, BJP leader

NEW DELHI: Lieutenant General Bipin Rawat’s appointment as army chief has become the latest flashpoint between the government and Opposition, days after a political row over the recall of high-value currency washed out Parliament’s winter session.

The Congress said it wasn’t questioning Rawat’s abilities but wanted to know why two senior people were superseded.

“Is it that all these officials who were superseded were not able? Or was it cherry-picking?” Congress leader Manish Tewari asked.

On Sunday, Tewari also pointed out how the NDA administration created controversies over other key appointments, such as that of the chief vigilance commissioner.

Former central board of direct taxes chief KV Chowdary was appointed as CVC after a long delay, triggering criticism from lawyers such as Ram Jethlamani and Prashant Bhushan.

The Congress also cited the “non-appointment” of a fulltime director of the enforcement directorate.

“Right now, there are questions about the CBI director… and they have still not notified the appointment of the Chief Justice of India,” said Tewari.

The Congress had written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi against the appointment of Rakesh Asthana as interim CBI director earlier this month, calling the process “vitiated and manipulated”.

Within hours, the BJP hit back, saying that the government had followed standard norms and that the Congress couldn’t dictate terms. “The government does not require the permission of 10, Janpath (Congress president Sonia Gandhi’s official residence),” Union minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said on Sunday. “I think till now the Congress is not able to understand that they have lost power at the Centre.”

The BJP and the Congress have been locked in a verbal war since the government recalled Rs 1000 and Rs 500 notes last month, a move that the Opposition says has hurt the poor and the farmers.

Controversy over the decision deadlocked the winter session, which saw little legislative business. In promoting Rawat, the claims of Eastern Army commander Lt Gen Praveen Bakshi, the senior-most general, and Southern Army commander Lt Gen PM Hariz, were ignored. But government sources said Rawat – who takes over on December 31 – was found “best suited” to deal with emerging challenges, including a “reorganised and restructured military force in the north, continuing terrorism and proxy war from the west, and the situation in the Northeast”.

Former army chief Shankar Roy Chowdhury also confirmed the government had the “final authority” to pick the army chief.

“I have no patience with what political parties are saying. I appeal to them not to politicise the last reputable institution of India which is world class,” said Roy Chowdhury, the last army chief from the armoured corps. But many opposition parties didn’t seem convinced. “Superseding in appointments always opens the up the avenue for many questions,” said Tathagat Satpathy, a leader of the Biju Janata Dal that is otherwise supportive of the government.

Communist Party of India leader D Raja reminded that the appointments in the army, CVC and other top-level positions had become controversial during the NDA regime. “The government should answer how these appointments have been made,” Raja said.

Slugfest over Gen Rawat

Govt defends appointment of Army Chief as Oppn questions move

Lt Gen Bipin Rawat

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, December 18

As the Opposition today questioned the Centre’s decision to appoint Vice-Chief of Army Staff Lt Gen Bipin Rawat as the new Army Chief, superseding two senior officers, the BJP said it was “extremely unfortunate” that the Congress “looks to politicise everything”.Editorial: New Army ChiefCongress spokesperson Manish Tewari demanded to know why Eastern Army Commander Lt Gen Praveen Bakshi and Southern Army Command chief Lt Gen PM Hariz were superseded. On the government’s defence that the decision was not unprecedented, he said, “Nothing can be extrapolated out of context to justify a supersession.”(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)Sources said one of the reasons Lt Gen Rawat had been selected was that he had served along the Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan and the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China. “In the current situation, we need a person with experience in the relevant area, that is operational experience,” explained a senior functionary in the MoD.He said Lt Gen Rawat was found the best suited “to deal with emerging challenges, including a reorganised and restructured military force in the North (read China); continuing terrorism and proxy war from the West, and the situation in the North-East.”He said selecting the most eligible Army Commander was the prerogative of the government, “irrespective of the Corps to which the officer originally belonged”. Lt Gen Bakshi is from the Armoured Corps.It was 30 years ago, when winter was setting over the Himalayan heights in Arunachal Pradesh, when the newly appointed Army Chief  ‘cut his teeth’ as a military officer.The Army, then led by General K Sundarji, was tasked to stall the ingress of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) near Zimithang, north-west of Tawang. General Sundarji launched ‘Operation Falcon’ and moved a brigade (some 3,000 men) north of Tawang, using IAF helicopters. A nine-month standoff ensued, militarily referred to as ‘Sumdrong Chu’. Troops were deployed all along McMahon Line. During this period, the Army launched a massive air-land exercise called ‘Chequerboard’ (October  1986 to March 1987) that entailed moving troops to almost all locations in Arunachal. The north-eastern state was granted full statehood in December 1986.Lt Gen Rawat, with just eight-year service then, took part in the event during which India stacked up 50,000 troops against PLA’s 30,000. China agreed to end the ‘military confrontation’ in November 1987.A retired Commander, meanwhile, questioned how Lt Gen Bakshi, commanding the vital Eastern Command, was found lacking in experience. He also commanded 9 Corps, based at Yol (Himachal), tasked with China and Pakistan. (With PTI inputs) 

ARMY CHIEF ROW

‘Govt has right, but seniority matters’

Veterans say move may affect functional environment, ethos of armed forces

Lt Gen TK Sapru, former goc-in-c, Western command

Vijay Mohan

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 18

The appointment of Vice Chief of Army Staff Lt Gen Bipin Rawat as the next Army Chief, superseding two other officers, has kicked up an intense debate on the government bypassing the long-standing convention of appointing the senior-most officer as the service chief.While there is no legal lacuna in the government’s move as the selection is ought to be done on a seniority-cum-merit basis, there is also a feeling in some quarters that the existing practices should not have been disturbed as it may have ramifications on the functional environment and ethos of the armed forces.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)The move may also affect the “line of succession” that defines the career path of senior officers based upon the arm to which they belong and their age and the ratio of officers from different arms being placed in particular appointments. Some officers also feel that the situation is unlikely to have a lasting impact on the army as the force is professional and mature enough to absorb unexpected developments.“The Army Chief-designate is an excellent officer, but I am not too happy with the move of the government as it may result in subjectivity in future and the possibility of the system being manipulated. There is no established system to compare officers at the level of army commanders and it is very difficult to decide who is better among his peers,” said Lt Gen TK Sapru, former GOC-in-C, Western Command.He said: “We were following a system of selecting the senior-most commander who was objective and should have carried on with it unless something wrong had been brought out.”Lt Gen AS Sekhon, former Director General Military Operations and 15 Corps Commander, said: “The concept of seniority should have been retained otherwise it may lead to politicisation of the army and officers at the top may line up to please the political leadership.”He said: “The principle of seniority has been accepted by all branches and the army’s hierarchy was mentally prepared for Lt Gen Bakshi to take over. The government’s move will create a huge dent in the functioning of the armed forces and create friction between different arms and services with the possibility of officers from different arms attempting to cut each other at the lower levels to gain edge.”Lt Gen Praveen Bakshi, an armoured corps officer, and Lt Gen PM Hariz, among the few Muslim officers to reach the top, became army commanders in August 2015, while Lt Gen Rawat became an army commander in January 2016. Lt Gen BS Negi, whose name also cropped up in the debate, is from the same course as Lt Gen Rawat and became an army commander in January 2016, but is junior to Lt Gen Rawat by virtue of his service number.“Legally, it is well within the government’s powers to choose a service chief from amongst the eligible officers. One aspect of service jurisprudence for selection to a post that is mandated for all central government departments is that there should be a ratio of at least 1:3,” Col SK Aggarwal, former officer of the Judge Advocate General’s Branch said.“Besides the career profile of an individual, several other factors such as suitability in the prevailing geostrategic situation, age commensurate with full tenure and other inputs from the defence and home ministries are considered,” he said.“Many officers get superseded at all levels for varying reasons in their course of service and this happens in other government departments also. So why make a noise with a lieutenant general getting superseded,” said Col Bipin Pathak, a former Intelligence officer, adding: “Ïnter se merit should always be the consideration for promotion and since it is the elected government that is answerable to the people, it has the right to chose whom they consider best for the post.