Current Events :
Dinesh Manhotra
Tribune News Service
Sarwah (Samba), June 9
The family of Uri martyr Havildar Ravi Pal has become a victim of caste prejudice as villagers are neither allowing the installation of the martyr’s statue at the main entrance of the village nor allocating a small piece of land to connect Ravi’s home to the link road.Ironically, after his martyrdom, the bumpy link road was named as “Shaheed Ravi Pal Marg” but villagers are not sparing land to allow construction of a 10-foot wide road up to Ravi’s house.In the upper caste-dominated Sarwah village, situated between the Swankhamore-Chang road and the Vijaypur-Ramgarh road, there are two dozen families belonging to backward classes and Scheduled Castes out of over 120 families. As Ravi’s family belongs to a backward class, it is facing caste prejudice.Although Ravi’s wife Geeta Devi sought to downplay caste bias, his brother Raj Kumar was forthright on the issue.“Obviously caste is one of the factors of not fulfilling commitment made to our family at the time of the martyrdom of my brother,” Raj told The Tribune while narrating how authorities were brazenly evading their responsibility of constructing a road to Ravi’s house and installing his statue at the main entrance.Ravi’s family is obviously shocked with the apathy of the local as well as the administration where petty considerations have eclipsed respect towards the soldier, who was martyred during the Uri terror attack.On September 19, 2015, during the cremation of Ravi, it was promised by the government that his statue would be installed at the main entrance of the village. As ministers, bureaucrats and other VIPs had to wade through water-logged fields to reach the martyr’s home, it was also committed that a road would be constructed to connect Ravi’s house to the link road.“For the past six months, I have been approaching the authorities to fulfil the commitments but it appears that those who are opposing the construction of road are more powerful than those who are at the helm of the affairs,” Geeta Devi told The Tribune. She recalled that local BJP legislator Chander Prakash Ganga, who is a Cabinet minister, had promised to install Ravi’s statue and construction of a road but nothing had been done so far. “We are ready to get his (Ravi’s) statue sculpted on our own expenditure but the authorities have failed to convince the people to allocate suitable land for it,” Geeta Devi said.Ramgarh Tehsildar Raman Chalotra said he had joined recently. “I will definitely look into the matter. Every possible help will be provided to the martyr’s family,” he said.
BJP ‘abandons’ martyrs’ families
Jammu: BJP leaders have no time to visit martyrs’ families of Jammu to enquire about their problems. Party’s national general secretary (organisation) Ram Lal was holding a door-to-door campaign, just two kilometres from the house of Uri martyr Ravi Pal, but the local leadership failed to take him to the martyr’s home. Ironically, during the campaign, BJP leaders were raking up peoples’ sentiments against Pakistan but they forgot Ravi’s family.
Army officer had come with seminar proposal, left amid stone-throwing
Ishfaq Tantry
Tribune News Service
Srinagar, April 18
Three days before violence erupted in Pulwama Degree College on Saturday, triggering Valley-wide protests on Monday, it is learnt that an Army vehicle came under attack on the campus last Wednesday.There was intense stone-throwing by students on an Army vehicle on April 12, when an Army officer of the Rashtriya Rifles arrived in the college to discuss a proposal with the principal for conducting a seminar on the campus.“At that time, the Army showed exceptional restraint and moved out their Casspir vehicle within 10 minutes of arriving in the college,” Pulwama Degree College principal Abdul Hameed told The Tribune.“Earlier, the Army officer concerned had called me on phone to seek permission for conducting a seminar in the college. I told him that I would get back after discussing the proposal with the senior staff of the college,” Hameed said while refusing to identify the officer. As the principal was discussing the proposal with the staff after the phone call, he heard some noise outside. “As I came out of my office, I saw an Army Casspir vehicle entering the college premises and students resorting to intense stone-throwing as they mistook it as a raid on the college,” the principal said while narrating the incident on April 12, which he said became the precursor to the police action later on Saturday.“Exhibiting immense restraint, the Army vehicle retreated and calm was restored in the college within half an hour. The students even resumed their classes afterwards,” the principal said, adding that for the next two days, that is April 13 and 14, the college was closed on account of gazetted holidays.“As soon as the college reopened on April 15, I saw two police vehicles entering the college premises around 11.30 am. This provoked the students, who resorted to stone-throwing. The police retaliated by resorting to intense shelling inside the college with nearly 5,000 students,” the principal said, alleging that the police entered the college premises without seeking permission or intimating about their arrival. The principal, who rang up the local Superintendent of Police and Inspector General of Police as the commotion broke out in the college, said he pleaded with the police personnel accompanied by the local SHO and a DSP-rank official to leave the college as the situation was getting out of control.“They yelled at me and started firing tear-gas shells,” he said. In the clashes between the police and the students, who were later joined in by outsiders, over 50 pupils of the college were injured.The police, however, maintained that the clashes erupted when a normal naka was established around 200 metres away from the college and some miscreants started throwing stones at the personnel manning the checkpost.In principal’s words…
Jammu, June 7
The Ex-Central Paramilitary Forces’ Welfare Association today alleged that the Central government was not interested in giving one rank, one pension (OROP) benefits to the paramilitary forces.In a meeting held under the chairmanship of its president Shashi Kumar Sharma, the association worked out a strategy to approach the Centre. The association said the OROP was for defence forces and not for the paramilitary forces.“Regarding the OROP, the Government of India said nothing in favour of former personnel of Central paramilitary forces. Injustice has been done to us by not granting us OROP. From jawans to generals of defence forces, all are pursuing their matter vigorously but the Directors General of the paramilitary forces are maintaining a silence on it,” a statement of the association said.Others who were present on the occasion included DK Chohan, Gurbachan Singh, Dalip Singh, Noor Mohammad, Ramnat Saini, Kamlesh Kumari, Ashok Kumar and Vijay Kumar. — TNS
Soldiers taking positions during a search operation in a forest area outside the Air Force base in Pathankot. File photo
New Delhi, April 16
A parliamentary panel has rapped intelligence agencies for the terror attacks in Pathankot, Uri and a few other places saying these strikes “exposed the deficiencies” of the agencies but there was no analysis of their “failure”.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs, headed by senior Congress leader P Chidambaram, said a year had passed since the January 2, 2016, terror attack at the Indian Air Force station in Pathankot but the probe has not been completed by the National Investigation Agency.
Moreover, it said, no analysis seems to have been done of the “failure” of the intelligence agencies to provide credible and actionable inputs regarding the attacks at Pathankot, Uri, Pampore, Baramulla and Nagrota.
“The committee feels that these attacks have exposed the deficiencies of our intelligence agencies,” it said.
While in the Pathankot attack, seven security personnel were killed, 19 army soldiers lost their lives in the attack at the Brigade headquarters in Uri on September 18 last year.
Terrorists also attacked a convoy of CRPF vehicles on June 25, 2016, at Pampore along the Srinagar-Jammu highway, killing eight paramilitary personnel.
While in Baramulla district of Jammu and Kashmir, militants attacked a camp of the Rashtriya Rifles killing a security personnel on October 3, 2016, seven soldiers were killed when an Army base in Nagrota in the state was attacked by militants on November 29, 2016.
“The committee, therefore, recommends that the (Home) ministry should instruct the NIA to complete the investigations of these attacks at the earliest so as to identify the loopholes in the intelligence setup in the border areas,” it said.
Taking note of “huge rise” in the number of infiltration, the committee said the government must carry out a thorough investigation into the sudden spurt in infiltration attempts along the Line of Control from across the border and find out vulnerabilities that are being apparently exploited by the infiltrators.
There were 364 attempts of infiltration in 2016 of which 112 were successful in comparison to 121 infiltration attempts and 33 net infiltration in 2015.
The committee also noted that there has been an increasing number of incidents of infiltration through tunnels from across the border.
The panel felt that in future this might become a major modus operandi of the infiltrators and the government must take proactive steps to foil such attempts.
“The committee recommends that the ministry must explore technological solutions for tunnel detection in border areas and should seek the help of other countries which have successfully developed tunnel detection systems,” it said. — P
Imphal, June 3
Three Assam Rifles jawans were on Saturday injured in a blast near the Indo-Myanmar border in Manipur’s Tengnoupal district, police said.The bomb, suspected to be an Improvised Explosive Device (IED), exploded at the junction of H Mongjang village and Imphal-Moreh road, about 100 km from Imphal, at about 2.15 pm when an Assam Rifle patrol party was moving on foot.Three jawans — Subedar Sher Ram, and Riflemen Sachin and Basumatari — were injured, police said.All three were airlifted by an Air Force helicopter to the military hospital at Leimakhong. — PTI
Kulbhushan Jadhav
New Delhi, April 16
India on Sunday said it was yet to get a response from Pakistan on its demand for a certified copy of the chargesheet as well as the military court order awarding death sentence to the retired Indian Navy officer Kulbhushan Jadhav.
“We have sought from the Foreign Ministry (of Pakistan) a certified copy of the chargesheet as well as the judgment in the death sentence of Jadhav, but there is no response yet from Pakistan’s side,” MEA spokesperson Gopal Baglay told reporters.
India had already announced that it would appeal against the death sentence to Jadhav.
Indian High Commissioner in Islamabad, Gautam Bambawale, had met Pakistan Foreign Secretary Tehmina Janjua on Friday in connection with the case and demanded a certified copy of the chargesheet and the judgment, besides consular access to Jadhav.
“India made the demand for the two documents on Friday when the Indian High Commissioner in Islamabad met the Pakistan Foreign Secretary,” said Baglay, replying to a question on the issue.
The death sentence to Jadhav, 46, was confirmed by Pakistan army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa after the Field General Court Martial found him guilty of “espionage and sabotage activities” in Pakistan.
Pakistan claims its security forces had arrested Jadhav from the restive Balochistan province on March 3 last year after he reportedly entered from Iran. It also claimed that he was “a serving officer in the Indian Navy”.
The Pakistan Army had also released a “confessional video” of Jadhav after his arrest.
However, India denied Pakistan’s contention and maintained that Jadhav was kidnapped by the Pakistan authorities.
External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj had warned that Jadhav’s execution would be taken by India as a “pre-meditated murder” and Pakistan should “consider its consequences” on bilateral relations, if it proceeds on this matter. — PTI
The FIR names a Brigadier but his name has not been included in the list of accused.
New Delhi, June 3
The CBI has arrested a Lt Colonel and a middleman in connection with an alleged transfer racket at the Army headquarters here in which lakhs of rupees were paid by Army officers to manipulate their postings.
Lt Col Ranganathan Suvramani Moni, posted in the personnel division of the Army, and middleman Gaurav Kohli were arrested while an alleged bribe of Rs 2 lakh was changing hands for the transfer of a Bengaluru-based officer, CBI sources said on Saturday.
(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)
The investigating agency had learnt of the illicit activities of some Army officers and laid a trap to arrest the two men.
The agency busted the racket involving senior Army officers posted at its headquarters here. They were allegedly giving choice postings for “huge illegal gratification” which ran into lakhs for a single transfer, sources said.
The expose is bound to send ripples in the Army as some more senior officers are suspected to be involved in the case, CBI sources said.
The FIR also names Brigadier S K Grover, DDG Personnel, but his name has not been included in the list of accused.
The case has been registered against Moni, Hyderabad- based army officer Purshottam, Bengaluru-based barracks and stores officer (BSO) S. Subhas and alleged middleman Gaurav Kohli.
The bribe was being paid through hawala channels, the CBI FIR alleged. The agency is also probing how Army officers were ready to pay lakhs of rupees to get a posting of their choice.
It is alleged that Moni entered into a criminal conspiracy with Kohli and Purshottam, an army officer posted in the engineer stores department (ESD), Kakinara, for influencing the transfer of various officers.
Purshottam allegedly contacted army officers who were either posted in different field formations or faced imminent transfer and were desirous of getting posted to their preferred locations.
He used to contact Kohli, who was close to senior officers in the personnel division of the army headquarters here.
Kohli used these contacts to pursue transfers of army officers in lieu of huge illegal gratification, the FIR said.
Purshottam allegedly requested Kohli to pursue the posting of one D S R K Reddy and Subhas in exchange for a huge bribe, it claimed. Both wanted to be posted from Bengaluru to Secunderabad or Visakhapatnam.
Moni assured he would help getting Subhas transferred through a senior officers in the Army headuquarters against payment of illegal gratification, it alleged.
Subhas allegedly delivered Rs 5 lakh as bribe to Kohli through hawala operators. “…Kohli visited residence of…Moni and conducted a meeting with some senior officers at the army headquarter in Delhi. Information also reveal that…Moni is in contact with Brigadier SK Grover DDG (Personnel) of Army Headquarter for the transfer matter of Subhas,” the CBI FIR stated.
It is alleged that Rs 2 lakh was to be paid by Kohli to Moni for Subhas’ transfer. —PTI
Simran Sodhi
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, April 13
India and Pakistan today hardened their stance on the death sentence awarded to Kulbhushan Jadhav. Pakistan alleges he is an Indian spy, while India maintains he is “innocent”.India reiterated that if Pakistan went ahead with the death sentence, it would amount to a pre-meditated murder.The Ministry of External Affairs said it has no information on Jadhav’s location in Pakistan or his condition, noting that it was in touch with the government there on this “immensely important” issue.In Islamabad, top military generals held a meeting and decided there would be no “compromise” on the death sentence awarded to Jadhav. Sources say India is exploring options, both soft and hard, for ensuring that Jadhav is brought back home.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)The rift within Pakistan between the civilian government headed by PM Nawaz Sharif and Army Chief Gen Qamar Bajwa is also evident. Rawalpindi barracks seem to have taken the initiative and are leading the discourse on the issue. Today’s corps commanders’ conference in Islamabad was presided over by Gen Bajwa, the military’s media wing Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) said.The generals were briefed about Jadhav and it was concluded that “no compromise shall be made on such anti-state acts”, the statement said. The Ministry of External Affairs put the ball firmly in Pakistan’s court, calling in question the legality of the sentence and in essence harping on two facts. One: If Jadhav was indeed a spy, why would he be carrying an Indian passport ? Two: Pakistan’s obstinate insistence to not grant India consular access violates international norms and raises questions on the authenticity of charges.“Consular access is usually expeditiously granted,” MEA spokesperson Gopal Baglay said. “We need to verify how this gentleman got to Pakistan; we don’t know the circumstances of his presence in Pakistan. For that we need to meet him which is part of international law,” he added. Meanwhile, Pakistan claimed “foreign spy agencies”, may have “trapped” and then abducted Lt Col Muhammad Habib Zahir who disappeared on April 6 from Lumbini, a Buddhist pilgrimage site near India’s border town of Sonauli. Pakistan was in touch with Nepal to trace him.
In the second and concluding article, The Tribune examines the need to do away with historical legacies and well-worn procedures as well as develop the fortitude to accept setbacks. Only a radical departure from all past practices may have the potential to help defence manufacturing stand on its feet.
THE natural expectation is that government should do what it takes to achieve a breakthrough in defence manufacturing. Every new political executive discovers the strength of tradition and of the constituencies in favour of the status quo, as well as the inherently conservative nature of all bureaucracies which are comfortable only with incremental changes. Fortunately, a strong government enjoying continuing popular support with a growing nationalistic fervour should be able to take big decisions and implement them. There are complex issues to grapple with and difficult decisions to be taken.In most technology and capital-intensive segments only one national entity can be supported to become strong enough to give autonomous capability. In the case of Europe, countries chose to consolidate their national air industries in European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS). After many years and considerable public spending, EADS succeeded in developing a real competitor to Boeing in the Airbus. In the Eurofighter, they developed a world-class military plane. Hence, taking a clear view of the optimal industry structure 10 to 15 years down the road and the future of the present set of ordnance factories and the defence PSUs in different segments is unavoidable. Since the economic reform process began, large PSUs have ceded space to new private sector entrants and become white elephants where now they can neither be privatised as they have no value, nor can they be closed because of the large workforce. Air India and BSNL are good examples. Is it desirable to replicate this? Is corporatisation of ordnance factories doable? Is greater professionalisation and empowerment along with gradual disinvestment to create, say, an equivalent of Boeing/Dassault in HAL, an option worth pursuing? Is strategic divestment to suitable Indian private firms with proven manufacturing ability a viable option and, if so, in which segments? Would having private strategic partners for a few platforms while leaving the rest of the system untouched, as seems to be under way now, the best way to go forward? Would it not be prudent to choose strategic partners only with proven manufacturing abilities, or, this is not relevant if there is sufficient financial depth? What safeguards, if any, are required in the eventuality of non-performance by chosen strategic partners? There are no easy answers. Taking a hard-headed view on these questions is necessary and is the intrinsic burden of leadership. The implication of having private sector entry and at the same time continuing with the public sector for the same platforms needs to be thought through. To illustrate, having many aircraft and helicopter manufacturing facilities, where only final assembly, controlled by foreign technology providers, is undertaken in India, without any real technological ability to develop new models growing in one organisation to become a world-class national player, would not serve the real purpose. There may be some less capital-intensive segments where genuine competition over time may be feasible and desirable. A rational calculated view needs to be taken on weapon systems where India should try and have one world-class player and where it can afford two players. This is equally relevant for sub-assemblies and components which are the actual building blocks and usually do not get the attention they deserve.Then, there is the widely prevalent view in the Armed Forces that the DRDO has not yet given them weapons that they would really like to use whether it is the LCA or the battle tank. In any case, whatever has been developed is an assembly of primarily imported engines, sub systems and parts. So, does it make sense to write off whatever has been done and accept failure? Or, is the ability to design and develop a weapon platform even with imported sub-systems, not a significant enough achievement which should give confidence that succeeding rounds of development of newer versions are bound to be better? Does it not then make sense to continue from what has been achieved and see what more is needed to produce newer versions which appear good enough to the armed forces? Should such development not be funded and undertaken continuously to develop systems which may be equivalent to what is being used by the forces now and as a potential supplement, in the first instance? Is the present system of having a centralised DRDO responsible for technology and system development with production enterprises making only modest efforts in research and development, optimal? Or, having different verticals with responsibility for both platform development and production, as is the case with all western defence firms, a better model with the advantages of clear focus, accountability, incentives and rewards? Could not the successful experience of ISRO and Atomic Energy of working in genuine development partnerships with Indian firms to develop almost all that they needed to overcome the handicap of the international technology denial regime be replicated? Should PPPs in system and technology development as well as manufacturing be pursued? Could the armed forces moderate their expectations by lowering the bar to have, not the best in class in the world, but what is good enough for what our northern and western neighbours possess? (From this perspective, many have argued that even the present LCA is good enough.) Willingness to lower the bar also increases competition as well as the ability to seek a higher degree of technology transfer for new systems needed now and which have to be necessarily procured internationally. Since the procurement system is tied to procedure and paranoid about any deviation from what is set out in the beginning, negotiating the best terms for technology transfer is not permitted. As a result, India is unable to even begin making full use of the window of opportunity which is now there, with the US making India a major defence partner for technology transfer. Every procurement process should have the bjectives of getting what the forces need and maximise national technological ability and reduce future import dependence. A good Indian experience to recall is that of Maruti. Through a search and negotiation process, Suzuki was chosen as the technology and equity partner. A smaller player, it was willing to go the farthest in technology transfer and genuine partnership. Maruti selected vendors in a fair manner very quickly, but not through the rigid price-bidding process the only permissible route today. Vendors were helped with technology tie-ups and became long-term partners and suppliers with periodic negotiated price revisions. Maruti, like other global car companies, undertook only final assembly. The outcome exceeded expectations. India was able to evolve a globally competitive private sector national auto-component industry. It is now a leading global hub for competitive small car manufacturing. On the international scene many firms, with frontline platforms, critical sub-assemblies, or materials/components, do not see much of a commercial future with declining defence budgets in their countries. They may be willing to part with technology, go in for genuine joint-venture partnerships, and even be available for acquisition — presenting an opportunity for technological leapfrogging. An empowered, bold leadership, acting strategically to create medium-term national capabilities is required to take a holistic view of procurement for specific needs, along with technology development and acquisition. An altogether different paradigm of decision making needs to be put in place. Without this, it is unlikely to make progress in defence manufacturing at the speed that is needed and also possible. (Concluded)The writer is former Secretary DIPP, Govt of India.
