“Complete operational autonomy had been given to commanders, we were geared up for a long haul. As we saw Doklam coming, additional formations had been moved beforehand Lt Gen Praveen Bakshi (retd), then GOC-in-C, Eastern Command

Vijay Mohan

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 8

As the confrontation with China at Doklam in the Northeast began to unfold earlier this year, an Indian Brigade Commander, accompanied only by his buddy, had walked across the border and warned Chinese troops to step back. China did not advance an inch thereafter.Revealing this here today, Lt Gen Praveen Bakshi (retd), the then General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Eastern Command, and the senior-most commander in the theater, claimed the Doklam (or Doka La) episode had been anticipated by the Indian establishment.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)Though China upped the ante through media and diplomatic channels, the spectre of war was very low, he said. There, however, was a possibility of China opening another front or a skirmish breaking out, Lt Gen Bakshi said at the two-day Military Literature Festival being organised by the Punjab Government.Interactions with the Chinese commander in Tibet during his earlier visit to India had indicated his operational interest in that region, and heightened Sino activity in the sector was observed too, he said.In June-August, Indian and Chinese troops had been locked in a 73-day confrontation at Doklam, a pass situated on the tri-junction of Sikkim, China and Bhutan, over the construction of a new road by China in the vicinity of a territory disputed by China and Bhutan.On August 28, it was announced that the confronting troops had disengaged, though reports were still emerging that the two sides continued to maintain troop formations in the sector.“Complete operational autonomy had been delegated to the commanders on ground and we were geared up for a long haul. There were clear-cut operational directions, requisite coordination among government agencies and the wherewithal was made available. As we saw Doklam coming, additional formations had been moved to the area beforehand and the troops were well acclimatised,” said Lt Gen Bakshi.The engagement with the Chinese government was only through the Ministry of External Affairs. At the same time, serious internal disturbances in neighbouring Darjeeling region resulted in New Delhi sending a firm message to the West Bengal government.Maintaining that psychological advantage lay with India, he said troops, while forming human chains, refused to back down and not even once did they break ranks. The area was under constant surveillance and a few instances of Chinese troops, who were mostly conscripts and regularly resorted to propaganda and playing loud music, breaking ranks at night were observed, he claimed.Calling for an analysis as to who or what prompted Chinese action at Doklam and at what level were the decisions taken, Lt Gen Bakshi said China now viewed India as a threat and the standoff had forced Sino troop deployment along the Line of Actual Control. “Earlier, they only used to patrol the area. But now they have started building defences,” he added.Another lesson from Doklam was that the border management of disputed boundaries needed a complete re-look and there could not be multiple agencies for a single border.

War books are not only a prominent source for understanding the world’s conflicts — past, present and future — but also a useful base material for sociologists and political scientists to forecast future societal trajectories

Wars we fought, but didn’t forget: (Left) Indian soldiers during the Battle of Longewala in the Western Sector during the 1971 War; in the trenches in World War I

Sandeep Dikshit

The written history of the world is largely a history of warfare — John KeeganHumans have always engaged in warfare. The earliest known evidence of intra-state conflict is a 3,500-year-old ivory knife handle that must have figured in one of the battles between the Egyptians and the Mesopotamians. Only 283 years since then have seen no recorded wars.The Westphalia concept of nation states in the West is also an outcome of a 30-year-long war in the seventeenth century.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)In the twentieth century, India’s impulses towards sovereignty and nationhood gathered steam after it contributed generously to the British effort in World War I. Among its neighbours, Russia became a Communist country after the same war while China turned one following wars between the Communists and the Nationalists, which were a result of the space provided by World War II. It may disappoint the creeping incursion theorists that 60 years later China’s borders have remained nearly the same. In fact, during its settlement with 12 countries, it actually gave away a lot of land it had claimed.This makes military history not only a prominent source for understanding the world’s conflicts — past, present and future — but also a useful base material for sociologists and political scientists to forecast future societal trajectories.It also gives a clue about the present militaristically aggressive behaviour of some nations such as the US, whose early leaders like Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln were raised in the crucible of wars and actually led battles.From a tangible perspective, history’s usefulness is more difficult to identify than applied sciences such as medicine or engineering. However, there is no such confusion regarding military history. Cynics may point out the futility of researching centuries-old muscle-and brawn-dependent warfare in an era of armed drones, nuclear submarines and inter-continental missiles. But technology and military history need not be irreconcilable; neither is technology a Silver Bullet. Military history, at the end, is also about technological change and how well or badly military forces adapted themselves to the changes, especially in the kinetics of tactics and strategy; the preparedness in logistics and administration, finessing of military doctrine military and theory, the degree of military professionalism and the mental agility of its leadership.It is also about normative application of the lessons learnt from past wars even if a copy-paste approach will likely bring grief.Military history need not be about mega clashes of armour and men. It could also be about learning from previous anti-terrorism campaigns for instance and applying them in the present instances.There is a caveat though: for soldiers, a mastery over military history does not translate into professionalism and competence; it can add to, but, is not a substitute for practical experience. A simplistic and distorted understanding can have adverse implications as the Americans recently experienced twice: Military professionals had cited the blowback against the British and Soviets to argue against a military intervention in Afghanistan, but then National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice had drawn a different conclusion: “The Soviets had never taken Kabul whereas the US will,” she said. The war is still on.It is true that military history alone is terribly inadequate in providing all the answers to all the issues confronting the politico-military policy makers of today. This is why an interdisciplinary approach is very important. At the same time, none can deny the lessons in capability of the political leadership, its synergy with the military brass and the military response and counter-response that come from studying past wars: the wars of 1962 and 1971 are studies in contrast while the 1965 battle would fall somewhere in between the two.In the end, every war ought to be a deliberate use of force to achieve political goals. In other words, in most cases, politicians flag off wars and the buck stops with them: win or lose. It is they who are answerable for a large number of critical components of a war: logistics infrastructure, expenditure on the military and the extent of indigenisation.The distilled lessons from military history thus become an integral part of a serving politician’s statecraft as also for tomorrow’s leaders, who are students today. For winning and avoiding wars, it becomes important to study military history in universities and schools as much as in military training institutes.

Governor NN Vohra in a forward area in Rajouri. Tribune Photo

Tribune News Service

Jammu, November 22

On a daylong visit to frontier areas of Rajouri district today, Governor NN Vohra received a comprehensive briefing from Maj Gen Suchindra, General Officer Commanding, 25 Division, about the management of the entire stretch of the Line of Control which comes in the area of responsibility of the Army formation.The Governor was also informed about the help which the Army provides to the people living in the border belt who undergo considerable suffering when the Pakistan army violates the ceasefire agreement and resorts to cross-border firing, which has been happening far too often this year.The Governor was also briefed by Shahid Iqbal, Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri, and his senior officials about the problems faced by the villagers along the LoC and the rescue, relief and rehabilitation support being provided by the district administration.The Governor advised the Deputy Commissioner to particularly ensure that the academic schedules of the schoolstudents were interrupted to the least possible extent.The Rajouri Deputy Commissioner also briefed the Governor about the shelter sheds being constructed for the safety of the locals in the villages which were being affected by Pakistan firing.The Governor spent a considerable time in an extensive discussion with Arvind Kumar Ishar, Director, Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK), Rajouri. They talked about the work done by the KVK to upgrade the activities in the agriculture and all allied sectors.The Governor asked the Deputy Commissioner to convene an early meeting with the Chief Agricultural Officer, all Block Development Officers, Rural Development Department staff, KVK Director and subject-matter specialists to review the entire agriculture sector. He said they should lay down clear targets for the establishment of integrated farming units, dairy farming, poultry farming, fish breeding, beekeeping, distribution of quality fruit plants and improved seed varieties. He told the DC to ensure that the existing wheat, paddy, maize, potato, fodder and vegetable seeds were replaced within a clear time frame by the best high-yielding seeds.The Governor observed that enough was not being collectively done by the Agriculture Department and the KVK to ensure rapid increase in production and productivity of all crops per hectare. He called upon the DC to take urgent charge of the crucial work.Review agricultural sector, officials told  The Governor asked the Deputy Commissioner to convene an early meeting with the Chief Agricultural Officer, all Block Development Officers, Rural Development Department staff, KVK Director and subject-matter specialists to review the entire agriculture sector. He said they should lay down clear targets for the establishment of integrated farming units, dairy farming, poultry farming, fish breeding, beekeeping, distribution of quality fruit plants and improved seed varieties.

There is need to take a break from tinkering with the GST rates. The focus, instead, should now be on the plumbing, ie on the processes and technology backbone — GSTN — even as we work to get the remaining sectors in the GST fold.

Mythili Bhusnurmath

Senior consultant, National Council of Applied Economic Research Much  was expected from the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council meet in Guwahati early November. In the event, it exceeded all expectations. Contrary to reports in the run-up to the meet, of fireworks between Opposition state finance ministers and the ruling NDA, the council demonstrated, for the 23rd time (!), its ability, and willingness, to come together to find common ground on admittedly complex issues. The sweeping rationalisation (read reduction) of rates and simplification of procedures is, no doubt, the biggest takeaway from the Guwahati meet. Yes, it is true that frequent tinkering reflects poorly on the tax regime introduced less than six months ago. But what is notable is that, as in past council meetings, all decisions were taken unanimously in the true spirit of ‘cooperative federalism’. This is no mean feat in a country as diverse as India. Not only are issues and challenges very different across states, there is also very little in common even on basic items of consumption, making agreement on rates and exemptions a Herculean task. The oft-quoted example here is of how coconut oil is an item of everyday consumption in Kerala but a cosmetic in most other states. If despite all these challenges, the GST Council was able to reduce rates on 211 items spread across all tax brackets, cut the rate on standalone restaurants from 28 to 5 per cent (without input tax credit), raise the threshold limit for the composition scheme to Rs 1.5 crore, extend the deadline for filing GST returns and simplify the filing process, it is a remarkable achievement. So, is it win-win for all concerned — the union and state governments, businesses and consumers? Not quite! Then, what are the sticking points? 

Flaws in GST

1. Exclusion of key sectorsOn the conceptual side, the biggest flaw is the exclusion of some key sectors, notably real estate, electricity and alcohol, from the GST regime. (Petroleum is also presently outside GST, but there is a provision to include it later). These sectors contribute about 37% of the tax revenue in most states, so keeping them outside the purview of GST takes away greatly from the GST’s USP of ‘one nation, one tax’ and related benefit of transparency and audit trail. The essence of GST is transparency and audit trail, which makes it is next to impossible for the ultimate beneficiaries to escape the tax net. In fact, it is the perfect antidote for the transgressions in the real estate sector, where a majority of the transactions escape the tax authorities’ radar. States, however, are reluctant to give up their taxing powers in respect of stamp duties levied on real estate transactions. Likewise, alcohol and tobacco are big cash cows for state governments; hence the reluctance to cede taxing powers. 2. Procedural & compliance issuesThe other major sticking points relate to procedural and compliance issues. Both are likely to ease now that the limit for the composition scheme has been raised to Rs 1.5 lakh and returns can be filed quarterly, instead of monthly. This will give both taxpayers and the IT backbone, the GST Network (GSTN), some respite. The GSTN has done a commendable job: since the rollout of GST on July 1, the portal has handled over 2.26 crore returns. But it has not proved equal to the gargantuan task of handling so many returns and in a very short period of time. The tendency of businesses to file returns at the very last minute compounds the problem. The net result is that despite the GSTN’s claim that the system is robust, taxpayers are far from happy. According to the vast majority, the GSTN system frequently stalls, with the result that it takes hours to file returns. With familiarity with computers being poor and net connectivity, even in the metros, patchy, chaos is inevitable. Online filing by close to 100 lakh businesses, many of which are filing returns for the first time, is bound to challenge the best of systems and GSTN.   3. Reverse charge mechanism issueThere are a couple of other niggling issues. Under GST, the buyer is required to pay tax on behalf of the supplier when he buys goods and services from unregistered dealers (known as reverse charge mechanism). This creates problems for small dealers since buyers are reluctant to pay when they are unable to claim input tax credit immediately. At the previous meeting of the Council, reverse charge provisions were deferred till March 31, 2018. However, as of now, the relief is only temporary potentially leaving small businesses at the mercy of large corporates post March 2018.

4. Invoice matching

Invoice matching (matching of individual invoices with returns) is another problematic area that needs to be addressed. Perhaps the Council could defer this till the GSTN stabilises so that reconciliation problems do not delay tax credits. E-way bills, meant to facilitate seamless inter-state transport of goods and eliminate corruption at border check posts, have been deferred for now; but given their centrality to facilitating quick and smooth movement of goods, must not fall prey to lobbying by unscrupulous elements.      Any tax reform as complex as GST is bound to be a work in progress, at least for the first few years. An ideal GST should cover all sectors and have few rates. But what we have is a partial GST, many rates, and worse, frequent tweaks. But does that weaken it to such an extent that it takes away from all that GST stands for: viz a simpler tax regime, broader tax base, no tax cascades, enhanced export competitiveness, greater regional equity, and, most importantly, greater transparency? No! Provided we allow rates to stabilise and focus on improving the plumbing, viz the processes and technology backbone, even as we work to get the remaining sectors into GST, we would still have a better system, warts and all, than earlier.

One AK-47 and two unexploded Improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were also recovered. ANI file

Chandel (Manipur), November 15

At least two Assam Rifles jawans and one militant were killed in an ongoing encounter in Chandel’s Sajik Tampak in Manipur.

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

One AK-47 and two unexploded Improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were also recovered.

A search operation by 4 Assam Rifles (28 Sector) was launched earlier in the day, when armed militants ambushed the Regiment at Chamoli Top at around 05:30 am.

Firing is under way.

More details are awaited. — ANI

The concept was formulated after deliberations keeping all stakeholders in the loop. It was approved by both UPA- as well as NDA-dominated Parliaments.

Ex-servicemen protesting for OROP at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi, recently. PTI

Aquestion often asked: “Why One Rank One Pension (OROP) only for military retirees?” Before attempting an answer, it is important to know that the acronym OROP is not an entirely a correct definition of the issue. It should have been “Same Rank, Same Service Tenure, Same Pension” — SRSSTSP. Since it would have been quite a mouthful, the term OROP became common.OROP, the genesis

Maj-Gen Rajinder Singh ‘Sparrow’Shergill,  a Cavalry Officer, hero of Zojila and twice Mahavir Chakra awardee, after his retirement and, as a sitting MP in the early eighties, spoke thus in Parliament: “I have the honour to state that I retired from the army as a Maj-Gen and have two sons serving in the army. Assuming that they also retire as Maj-Gens and, after retirement, if they stayed under the same roof as I, the sons would be getting more pension than their father because the father retired earlier. What a dichotomy!” Mrs Indira Gandhi, then Prime Minister heard the General Officer with rapt attention and understood what he spoke. A sharp woman, she was immediately convinced in principle and realised the dilemma of Maj-Gen ‘Sparrow’, and that of all military retirees, needed holistic consideration/re-evaluation. The same day in 1983, she constituted a committee headed by KP Singhdeo, a Brigadier in Territorial Army and a sitting MP from Odisha, to examine the issue and suggest measures to bring parity in pensions of the past and future defence retirees, on a basic premise of natural justice, that no senior may be brought lower than his junior — a concept which is now understood as One Rank One Pension.The present government, in its pre-election gambit to woo ex-servicemen in 2013, promised to fulfill this long overdue and legitimate entitlement. However, in a display of bad faith, on November 7, 2015, the NDA government drove the last nail in the coffin by diluting and granting a falsely labeled OROP.Why OROP only for military retirees?Any organisation that has service conditions similar to that of the soldiers of the Defence Forces has a rightful case for OROP. The average soldier retires at young age of 35, just when his domestic responsibilities are waxing, and risks both his life and limbs as part of his duty and obligation to the nation. His fundamental rights are curtailed by the law, under sovereign guarantee that his needs will be cared for and therefore he has no institution to fall back to except the government. Unlike the police and every other organization in India, soldiers are prohibited from forming unions or associations to fight for justice. Not to mention the type of hard field service locations that he has to endure, and implications on his family, affecting financial life, and, looming early retirement. The latter is because the state requires a young and fit force, and because its pyramidal structure cannot absorb him, he is let go in the prime of his life. In a nutshell, OROP to the military retirees is meant basically to compensate for their mandatory early retirement.Why no OROP to other uniformed servicesRegarding no OROP to other uniformed services Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) like BSF, CRPF, ITBPF etc, the answer is in the questionnaire: (a) Irrespective of their rank, they can serve up to 57 years unlike the military personal who are made to retire at 35 and upwards depending upon their rank. (b) The CAPF are assured minimum three promotions, but for defense forces, there is no such assurance. The service conditions of Defence Forces and CAPF too are different. The concept of “One Rank One Pension” was formulated after deliberations keeping all stakeholders in the loop. The concept was approved by two Parliaments, UPA- as well as NDA-led, but even after more than three years of the latter, it is yet to be implemented in its entirety.The government brazenly continues to deny the ex-servicemen (ESM) their due- their promised OROP, not realising that today’s soldier is tomorrow’s ESM and his morale is the nation’s biggest strength. It is neither statesmanship nor good governance and is not in the overall interest of the security of India. Why are faujis still protesting?If the NDA government loftily claims that OROP to military retirees has been granted, then why are faujis still protesting? It is because the government, in November 2015, arbitrarily altered the approved definition of OROP, equalised the pension of the past defense pensioners by giving them one time raise and maliciously termed it as OROP. The veterans felt let down at that sellout and decided to continue their peaceful protest from Jantar Mantar, asking the government for the approved and promised OROP in its entirety. Surely they are not foolish enough to continue to agitate if the actual OROP had been granted.The NDA government should well heed the warning: the defence fraternity of near five crore is a formidable electorate. Military veterans (many of them war-decorated), mostly in their twilight years, have been protesting peacefully from a footpath near Jantar Mantar for the past 28 months, asking the government to fulfill the promise of granting them correct OROP. The government continues to remain in denial mode. The exservicemen have no one to fall back to except their civilian brethren. Shouldn’t the people of the country sit up, lend their ears and peacefully be their voice too? For, didn’t these retired soldiers keep you all safe when they were young and in active service? 

New Delhi, November 3

The Railways has increased the monthly cap on tickets booked on the ICRTC portal from six to 12 for Aadhaar-verified passengers.The move, which came into effect on October 26, is believed to be an innovative way for the railways to encourage passengers to link their Aadhaar numbers to their online booking accounts on IRCTC. — PTI