R Sedhuraman,Legal Correspondent,New Delhi, February 15

The Supreme Court today endorsed the government’s command exit policy for promotions in the Army in order to reduce the age profile of commanding officers and achieve optimal combat effectiveness, as suggested by The Ajay Vikram Singh committee in the light of the 1999 Kargil war.“There is nothing perverse, unreasonable or unfair about the policy that the age of officers serving in combat arms and combat arms support will be lowered by creating additional vacancies to be allotted on command exit model,” a Bench comprising Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justice Kurian Joseph ruled in a 58-page judgment.The court delivered the verdict on appeals by the Centre challenging the Armed Forces Tribunal’s March 2, 2015, order quashing the government’s January 20, 2009, policy circular.Citing the lower age profiles of commanding officers in Japan, China and Pakistan, the government had sought to ensure quicker promotions for such officers in combat arms and combat arms support in India by creating additional posts for them. The affected officers in other units had gone to the AFT, challenging the circular.The SC ruled that all Army officers could not be treated as belonging to a single cadre as in the case of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) or the Indian Police Service (IPS). While hearing the appeals, the court had framed a question: “Do officers serving in arms and arms support services constitute a single cadre?”“We have no difficulty in answering the question in the negative and holding that officers in service streams do not constitute a single cadre with those serving in arms and arms support for purposes of allocation of additional vacancies created pursuant to the recommendations made to the government by the AV Singh committee,” the Bench said.As a result, it refused to accept the contention of the affected officers that the policy had denied them their “legitimate expectation for batch parity”.

The glacier affords India strategic, diplomatic and psychological advantage

The hostile conditions test a soldier’s mettle.

SIACHEN GLACIER is known variously as the ‘highest battlefield in the world’, ‘third pole’, ‘largest non-polar glacier’ and a supremely ambiguous cartographical description as ‘thence north to the glaciers’ (on official maps that thought it too desolate and unforgiving a region for physical inhabitation, to worry about proper demarcation beyond the coordinate NJ9842) — a historical curse of the incomplete task of defining boundary lines along the Indo-Pak borders. Today, it has evolved into a perennial flashpoint of potential military muscle-flexing and diplomatic saber-rattling. The recent horrific avalanche tragedy that swallowed 10 soldiers (one was subsequently and miraculously rescued), reiterated its infamy as the most inhospitable environment to be deployed under, with the unpredictable supremacy of nature’s fury, that accounts for higher fatalities than actual enemy-combat. Such tragedies inevitably resurrect the talk about demilitarising the glacier and the draining ‘cost’ of retaining it. To start with, it’s important to appreciate the evolution of the dispute, the historical conduct of the stakeholders in Siachen, prevailing ground situation and the potential stakes involved, and only then, juxtaposing the element of ‘cost’ to retain the current status of militarisation.The fractious Indo-Pak border relations of cloak-and-dagger moves got a surreptitious entry into the glacier in the 50s and 60s, which was hitherto unoccupied and barren, by Pakistan issuing ‘permits’ for international mountaineering expeditions, thereby sneakily establishing its ‘claim’ on the region — giving birth to a new form of strategic doctrine called ‘Oropolitics’, the abuse of mountaineering towards political purposes. In the 70s, India resorted to calling the bluff and counter the territorial allusions with its own mountaineering expeditions to establish its rightful territorial credentials and claims,  but this was still shadow boxing at best, with no permanent deployment to ‘hold’ the territory from a military angle. Traditionally, Pakistan has always dabbled in ‘low-investment-high-impact’ tactics of covert military activism. Immediately after Independence, the tribal influx of Afridi raiders into the Kashmir valley, with the tacit support from the Pakistani military, laid the pattern for all subsequent adventurism. Pakistan’s creative bent of similar tactics manifested again in 1965 via Operation Gibraltar, extreme policing brutality in 1971 to hold on to Bangladesh, recent Kargil misadventures and the multitude of support history to various internal insurgencies in India are reflective of the infamous Zia-ul-Haq’s ‘bleed through a thousand cuts’ philosophy. In almost all cases, Pakistan has initially feigned ignorance about the genesis of the contentious issues, or when exposed, attributed the same to ‘non-state’ actors — either way, consistently displaying malintent or duplicitous behaviour that does not augur well for any bilateral discussions that are to be based on mutual trust and respect of the terms of agreement. In an unparalleled and unprecedented act of strategic generosity, it officially handed over 5,180 km of territory in Aksai Chin to China in 1963 — thus drawing China permanently into the hyphenated Indo-Pak dispute and ensuring a strategic pivot to buttress its own counter claims. Thus now, the northern part of J&K theatre has a trilateral dimension.Even though Pakistan has a relatively easier access leading up to the glacier, the Indian Army holds the strategically vantage high-points to dominate it. This was achieved through a textbook military operation (Operation Meghdoot) by the Indian defence forces in 1984 to preempt the Pakistani move of capturing the glacier militarily, and then rebuffing the Pakistani counter-assaults in 1987 and 1989 (Brig Pervez Musharraf was personally involved in the ill-fated first assault that would have scared his mind to the geo-political reality, only to reopen the wounds in Kargil in 1999, as the chief of Pakistan army). This ground reality in Siachen explains the Pakistani amiability and willingness to discuss demilitarisation of the glacier to neutralise its obvious disadvantage on ground. Kargil is also a grim reminder in terms of the subsequent ‘costs’ of regaining a position once-held, though taken over by the enemy, clandestinely. Such a scenario is plausible given the pattern of military moves in the region.Importantly, the biggest ‘cost’ element is human life and the loss of limbs owing to the surreal environmental conditions of -50 degrees that test the spirit, instinct and existence of a soldier. No one understands the vagaries of nature better than a field soldier, but he does not act on individual volition, he is trained to execute the state’s order. It is imperative that no efforts should be spared to ensure the best quality equipment, infrastructural support to sustain operational efficacy and familial/monetary compensation to soldiers to endure such hardship. The glaring inequities on this front affronts the soldier’s sensibilities. It is more probable that the ‘cost’ being alluded to pertains to the bandied figure of Rs 5 crore spent on sustaining Siachen deployment, every day. While this is a serious amount, but, when contextualised to the ‘cost’ of retaining territorial integrity, it becomes immaterial. The oft-quoted status of land irrelevance by way of ‘not a blade of grass grows’, is the sort of alluvial appreciation not indulged by the defence forces in deciding if the said tract of national land is worth defending, irrespective of the ultimate price paid by the soldiers in doing so, the quality or fertility of soil be damned. Given the trilateral border disputes across J&K, and with China on Arunachal, creative pragmatism of demilitarising Indian lands is loaded with dangerous import as the same logic can be extended to other contentious areas as well. Besides, the critical issue of national integrity, the civil, administrative and political decision-making should also incorporate the notional future ‘cost’ from the repercussions of intentional or unintentional military withdrawals. The cost of rectifying or reclaiming lost ground is almost always prohibitively ‘expensive’. The soldiers need to be adequately enabled, empowered and meaningfully respected beyond platitudes. Soldiers who are physically present have never raised an excuse to surrender the hard-fought and well-earned positions on the glacier. The Pakistanis also suffered a similar avalanche-related incident in Gyari region in 2012, killing 140 persons. This is the sad truth of a soldier’s life. Militarily, despite the immense challenges, Siachen affords us the strategic, diplomatic and psychological advantage that could well reverse with the creative suggestions to demilitarise it, given the history, geo-politics and the stated intent of all the stakeholders in the region. — The writer is a former Lt Governor of Andaman and Nicobar Islands & Puducherry

An officer of the Indian Army, who was posted in Jammu and Kashmir, has disappeared while on a train journey.

Captain Shikhar Deep, 25, was traveling from Bihar to Delhi on February 6-7.  A cousin who went to receive him at the Delhi station on Sunday found the young officer’s luggage, phone and wallet, which is, according to his father, missing Rs. 20,000 in cash.

Captain Deep’s family lives in Kathihar in Bihar.  His father Colonel Lieutenant Anant Kumar is posted in Ranchi where his battalion – 623 EME – is now stationed.

According to the police, Captain Deep’s luggage was found in the coach he was travelling in, but the officer was nowhere to be found and his mobile was also switched off. He had last spoken to his family on the morning of February 6.

The ticket examiner and the man who provided bed-sheet in the coach, said he was last seen at Kanpur during the journey.

The army suspects that the Captain must have fallen prey to groups who travel on trains and drug and rob people. The army has asked the media to help in the search for the officer.  The description sent by the army is “Height 5’6″, wearing black/brown blazer, off-white T-Shirt, blue jeans, green jungle shoes.”

Major General Amil Kumar Shori is the Chief Postmaster General of Himachal Pradesh and enjoys a status equivalent to the Additional Secretary to the Government of India (See photo). His office is responsible for governing nine postal divisions, one railway mail service division, one postal stores department and the office of Director of postal accounts. The postal circle of the state was carved out of the erstwhile north-west circle in December 1986 and proudly claims to have the highest post office in the world at Hikkim (14,567 feet) under Rampur Bushahr postal division.I met General Shori for the first time on the university campus where both had gone to deliver lectures on gender sensitivity. His deliberations were engaging. Later, I came to know that he had a flair for writing too and had authored a couple of books. ‘Seven Shades of Rama’ gives expected shining hue to the character of Rama as son, brother, husband, warrior, king, Rishi and Maryada Purushottam (See photo).The base of what Shori had written in the book is the Cantos taken from different chapters of the Ramayana and portraying Rama as we all know him. The new dimension to the character given in the novel ‘Asura – Tale of the Vanquished’ by Anand Neelkantan that I had recently finished, continued reverberating in my mind while reading the book.Earlier, Acharya Chatursen Shastri had written a novel ‘Vayam Rakshamah’ depicting the establishment of Raksh Sanskriti in the South, i.e. a culture that provides security to the people and that is why Ravana is Rakshas – the saviour, a king given to good governance. General Shori dedicates the book to “Rohit Suri whose untimely demise left an unfilled void in our family”. It is upsetting and pained me.Another book that Shori has penned is ‘Indian Rajarshi and Greek Philosopher King – Principles of Good Governance’. It is from this one that I have dug out the tenets of good governance as these existed during the times of the Mahabharata. Bhishma, when he was steadily dying on the bed of arrows – sharshaiyya – sermonises Yudhisthir about the governance as is narrated in Shanti / Anushasan Parva of the great epic.He says that vigilance is the main attribute of governance. An ignorant king living in the dark blackens the art of governance. What happened in Pathankot recently? The second tenet is self-discipline. Bhishma gives 36 components of it and expected the king to have self-control over him. Before Seneca could utter “Auditur et altera pars” or the other side shall be heard as well, Bhishma had already lectured Yudhisthir on impartiality as tenet of governance. Trust is the next attribute and Shori writes, “It is the duty of the king to make sure that there are no signs of any distrust among the people and officials.”The Mahabharata is also concerned about public wealth and has added taxation as part of governance. It says that taxation should be handled as bumblebee does a flower, extracts its sweetness but does not damage it. Fear is the next tenet and Bhishma has its two concepts. When Arjuna said without the fear of the law and the rules, the social edifice would crash, Bhishma agreed to it and added that the king should also be afraid of the hands of the law which could hook him, similarly an Adharmi (unrighteous) should have this fear but a Dharmatma should always enjoy the freedom from fear.The Mahabharata also emphasised on proper balancing of kshma (reconciliation) and bala (force). Bhishma says in Shanti Parv that a king should be like an autumn sun which is neither very hot nor too cold, i.e. he should neither be too harsh nor extremely gentle. Those desirous to know where in the Mahabharata these shlokas appear, they may go in for the book. I would call it as short and sweet compilation.—The writer is a retired bureaucrat

Ten soldiers died in an avalanche at the Siachen Glacier on Wednesday. A Tribune Photo

Ravi Krishnan Khajuria,Tribune News Service,Jammu, February 4

At the Siachen Glacier, the highest battlefield in the world, hostile weather, icy terrain, sub-zero temperature, low oxygen and high-altitude sickness form a lethal mix, taking a heavy toll on men in olive green than any conflict with India’s arch-rival — Pakistan.Pakistan has the same story of losing more men to the weather vagaries than skirmishes between the two countries.As per statistics, 869 soldiers have lost their lives since April 1984 when India initiated “Operation Meghdoot”, airdropping its men to pre-empt a move by Pakistan to occupy the strategic heights.With 10 more Army men falling to an avalanche, the death toll has now gone up to 879 since 1984.The Army and the Air Force have been running against time to trace and rescue survivors, if any, among the 10 soldiers who went missing after an avalanche wiped out an Army camp at a height of 19,600 feet on Wednesday morning.On Siachen’s significance to India and what makes it a dangerous place, Northern Command’s defence spokesperson Col SD Goswami said: “Siachen’s terrain, its strategic location and geographical importance have given it a paramount place in the annals of history. The soldiers deployed on the glacier endure the worst weather conditions throughout the year.“At times, the troops have to unavoidably take up defences in the areas around steep slopes and crevices, which might send tonnes of snow and rubble crumbling down without any warning and completely obliterate the camps, communication lines, bury personnel and everything else. In such unstable conditions on the glacier, the terrain, climate or altitude can take its toll on anything.”However, Colonel Goswami added that with rhythm in his steps, faith to serve the nation and prayers on his lips, a soldier goes on his way up to the glacier.An Army source said that since 1984, the Army had lost 869 of its men at the 76-km Siachen Glacier. A majority of them have died of hostile weather conditions such as avalanches, landslides and floods and in some cases due to the high-altitude sickness, he added.Indian and Pakistan have been pitted against each other at the Siachen since 1984.“Loss of appetite, frostbite and high-altitude pulmonary edema (watery fluid collecting in the cavities or tissues of the body) are some of the diseases to which our men are exposed. There were instances in the past when some of our men contracted Monge’s disease that causes loss of high-altitude tolerance after prolonged exposure, characterised by extreme polycythemia (abnormally increased concentration of haemoglobin in the blood), exaggerated hypoxaemia (abnormally low level of oxygen in the blood) and reduced mental and physical capacity, relieved by descent,” he said.A defence official said both India and Pakistan had lost more men to hostile weather than conflicts between the two sides on the glacial heights.“Since 2003, guns have been silent on the 110-km Actual Ground Position Line after India and Pakistan inked a ceasefire in November that year,” he added.However, a senior Army officer said the past conflicts with Pakistan and China, growing proximity between China and Pakistan via the Karakoram Pass and trust deficit with Pakistan, made strategic Siachen Glacier indispensable to India and it could not afford to withdraw its troopsOn an average, India spends Rs 5 crore a day for replenishing supplies to its men at the Siachen.India controls about two-thirds of the glacier, besides commanding two of the three passes while Pakistan occupies the Gyong La Pass, which overlooks the Shyok and the Nubra river valleys and India’s access to the glacier from Leh district in Ladakh.Indian soldiers currently hold the strategic Saltoro Ridge which overlooks Pakistani positions.At 5,472 meters above sea level, the Siachen Glacier is located in the Karakoram mountain range, which has some of the highest peaks in the world. The northern mountains of the glacier mark the watershed between Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent. Bereft of vegetation, the glacier is one of the world’s most inhospitable regions, where the temperature plunges to – 40°C.