Sanjha Morcha

What’s New

Click the heading to open detailed news

Current Events :

web counter

Print Media Reproduced Defence Related News

Can’t Give Women Combat Roles, There Will be Ruckus When Maternity Leave is Denied: Army Chief Bipin Rawat

In an exclusive conversation with News18, General Rawat said combat role would put women at risk and they can’t leave behind young children.

New Delhi: Army chief General Bipin Rawat on Saturday said women are not ready for combat roles and gave reasons like they have the responsibility of raising kids and a woman officer would feel uncomfortable at the frontline and accuse jawans of peeping as she changes clothes.

In an exclusive conversation with News18, General Rawat said that while he was ready to introduce women to combat roles, the Army may not be as most jawans come from villages and they may not accept a woman officer leading them.
He also highlighted the issue of maternity leave and said the Army would not be able to give her leave if she is the commanding officer as she can’t leave her unit for six months, but said objecting to the leave could create a “ruckus”.

Here are the edited excerpts of the conversation:

Q. Women make very good soldiers, but why isn’t the Army accepting them?
A: That’s a misnomer.

Q. Military Police doesn’t count. Are there any women in combat roles, tell me?
A: We have women officers as engineers, they are doing mining and demining work. In air defence, they are manning our weapon systems. But we have not put women in frontline combat because what we are engaged in right now is a proxy war, like in Kashmir.

If there is just one officer in a company and if that officer is a lady… suppose you have to go for an operation. Everybody is ready, company commander has to lead. Now in that operation you have to deal with terrorists, there will be a firefight in which the commanding officer dies, company commander dies, and so the lady officer can also die or become a casualty.

Q. Everyone knows that risk but women are volunteering to go now.
A: They are going, yes. I will give you an example. A lady who died was in service for 7-8 years. She has a kid of 2 years. He is in Delhi or Chandigarh and parents are taking care of the baby. So what I am saying is, now do you think we are ready for this?

Q. Women can fly fighter jets but not armoured tanks?
A: See, I am not saying a women who has children doesn’t die, she can also die in a road accident. But in combat, when body bags come back, our country is not ready to see that.

Secondly, what will happen is there is just one woman and rest around her are just jawans. She is very much a commander so she has to do everything. She will have to go for operations. But even today we don’t have that acceptance. Even today our jawans come from villages, so that acceptance will take time.

Let me tell you one thing, we have started copying western ways. I did a course in US. We had 4 ladies and 10 male officers. So what happens is after every 3-4 hours you get a break of 1 hour in which you are supposed to have your lunch or you can go to the gym. Now when we go to the gym, we all change in the gym clothes in classroom all of us.

Q. This is just logistics.
A: When I was new, I would look the other way because ladies were also there but that is the culture there. They do it this way. We need to get this system. Now what will happen will be if there will be a lady officer here. Our orders are that a lady officer will get a hut in the COB, then there are orders that we have to cocoon her separately. She will say somebody is peeping, so we will have to give a sheet around her.

Q. These are all just assumptions.
A: If you think this, then even in Delhi, ladies tell me that people peep. I am talking about isolation situation when she has 100 jawans around her but it happens here also in Delhi.

Q. Are you saying army isn’t ready to accept women combat officers?
A: See I am ready, it is not that army is not ready. You are getting into something now you answer. Will she command?

Q. Why not?
A: Ok, so now I make her a commanding officer. She is commanding a battalion. Can that lady officer be away from her duties for 6 months?

Q. No.
A: Then what happens? Do I put a restriction on her to say that in that command tenure you will not be given maternity leave? If I say that, there will be ruckus created.


IAF to give MIG-21 for permanent display in Chandigarh

Ramkrishan Upadhyay

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh , December 6

Residents of the City Beautiful will have an opportunity to see the MIG-21 fighter aircraft grounded by the Indian Air Force (IAF) as the Air Force authorities have agreed to provide one for permanent display at Sector 31. Besides that, the Air Force will also provide one MI 17 helicopter for display.

Chandigarh Mayor Devesh Moudgil said he had requested the Air Force authorities to allot a fighter plane to the city a year ago. With his constant efforts the IAF agreed to give a MIG-21 fighter aircraft and one helicopter for installation in the city.

“The place for displaying the MIG 21 has been finalised. The grounded aircraft will be installed at the Japanese Garden in Sector 31. The place for helicopter will be decided later,” he added.

“While the necessarily expenditure for the installation of the plane will be borne by the Municipal Corporation, the Air Force will maintain it in future,” he said.

“A team of IAF technicians will come for the installation. Displaying of an aircraft will make people of the city proud of the IAF,” he added.

“Chandigarh has long association with the Air Force. The city has a training school, 12 Wing and 3 BRD Station,” he added. “The display will encourage more and more youth to join Air Force and other defence services,” the Mayor said.

The tricity already has a tank displayed at Leisure Valley in Sector 10 and twin tanks at the entrance of the Chandimandir Cantonment in Panchkula. One decommissioned Air Force helicopter has also been displayed on the Punjab Engineering College (PEC) campus in Sector 12.


HAL CEO says Rafale deal negotiations with Dassault Aviation went south due to disagreements over technology transfer

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) CEO R Madhavan in an interview answered questions over the Rafale deal negotiations with Dassault Aviation, saying that the deal breaker was because of disagreement over technology transfer and that HAL man hour rates are lower than global rates. The CEO also asserted that the focus must be on the final cost.

The clarifications came from the CEO after BJP minister Babul Supriyo on 27 September had indicated that HAL lost on the Rafale deal because it quoted 2.57 times more man-hours to build fighter jets. In an interview with CNN-News18, Madhavan also said that HAL is not actively looking for any offset business offers and said that “we work in offset business if it is in our domain.”

Madhavan had further stated that HAL is primarily engaged in manufacturing aircraft and it has technology transfer agreement with foreign original equipment manufacturer (OEM) but as far as offset is concerned, “we are not going to actively pursue offset deal.”

Image of chairman of defence PSU Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) - R Madhavan. ANI

While talking about the deal with Dassault, he said that first quote by the French aviation firm was 170 percent higher.

HAL was to produce 108 fighter jets locally in a joint venture with French firm Dassault Aviation in the deal for 126 Rafale jets that the previous UPA regime had negotiated. The state-owned firm, however, was left out in the deal as the present government signed to buy 36 fighter jets in ‘fly-away’ condition from France, reported PTI.

In an interview with news agency ANIDassault CEO Eric Trappier was questioned about the initial agreement with HAL and the subsequent breakdown of talks with the Indian PSU for production of Rafale jets. Trappier had said that if the initial deal of 126 jets went through they would not have hesitated to work with HAL and Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance.

“It’s because the 126 didn’t go smooth that the Government of India had to reconfigure to urgently acquire 36 from France. And then I took the decision to continue with Reliance, and HAL even said in the last few days that they were not interested to be part of the offset. So, it has been done by my decision and the decision of Reliance to invest in a new private company,” added Trappier.


We Can Use Strike Drones in Kashmir If People Will Accept Collateral Damage : Army Chief

The Indian army is capable of using drones to attack hostile targets inside Jammu and Kashmir and across the Line of Control, and sees “no problem” in using them provided the nation is willing to accept “mistakes” and “collateral damage”, army chief Bipin Rawat said on Wednesday.

He was responding to a question about India following the example of the United States in using strike drones. India has not used air power in domestic counter-insurgency operations since the 1960s, largely out of concern over civilian casualties.

“There is just no problem in using these kind of weapons” on either the Indian side of the Line of Control or in Pakistan-occupied territory, said General Rawat – so long as there was no backlash in public opinion or from the international community.

The army chief delivered the ninth Y.B. Chavan Memorial Lecture at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses in the capital. His subject was ‘hybrid conflict’ – a term that describes a range of hostile strategies that a belligerent can use in place of conventional warfare, especially against an enemy with a strong conventional military advantage.

The lecture focused on the threat of hybrid warfare aimed at India, mainly by Pakistan. He underscored the use of social media for one hybrid threat – the radicalisation of young people in Kashmir – and sketched out the need for “proactive defence”.

If the nation will spare us’ ::

After his prepared lecture, General Rawat took questions from the audience. His full remarks in reply to the question on drones were as follows:

“When you talk of strike drones, how does the Israeli strike the Hezbollah – how do they do it? You see, they have sources on the ground, who pinpoint a vehicle – who say that, this is a vehicle in which a leader has just come out of a house, and somebody has just given the information. They electronically mark that vehicle.

“That vehicle gets marked. And now a drone takes off in the air, and hits that vehicle. God help you if you’re in the following vehicle – you’re also gone.

“Now, this kind of thing is possible in that area – in that country. In our country, you’ve seen the kind of repercussions… the kind of flak that you face when you take such action even against a stone-thrower, who’s carrying out offensive action against you.

“In our country, the way things are moving, it’s very nice to say we need these drones. But will you accept mistakes being committed by such weapons systems? You have to accept it. If the nation will spare us, for the kind of mistakes that may get committed using such kind of weapons, then I think we can take a call.”

At this point, the officer asking the question clarified that his question was about deploying drones across the Line of Control: “I’m talking across – to kill their leaders, basically.”

General Rawat answered:

“You see, across also there can be mistakes. Either way, whether in your territory or the territory across, there will be mistakes. So if we are willing to accept these mistakes, and we feel that there will be no repercussions, there will be no backlash, there is a way forward.

“It’s not to say that we can’t use it. That is the reason why we are trying to procure these weapons. But these weapons are being procured more for… not for the hybrid warfare systems, we’re looking at it from the conventional war… but yes, anything that we procure has got dual use.

“But the first issue is of collateral damage. We get so concerned. In your own nation, your people get concerned about collateral damage so much – when you are fighting this kind of warfare, I think you have to accept that collateral damage will happen. It is war. If that is something which we can accept, then there is just no problem in using these kind of weapons.

“But can we accept it. Will the international community get after us? Or will they spare us in case mistakes happen? That is a call we have to take. Otherwise there is just no problem in using it.”

Hybrid threats, from Russia to Assam ::

Hybrid warfare implies a wide and shifting set of hostile acts, from irregular strategies used through history – instigating guerrilla uprisings or terrorist acts ­– to 21st-century subterfuge, like cyberattacks and psy-ops via fake news and digital propaganda.

In the present day, Russia is widely thought to be at the cutting edge of hybrid warfare, within its neighbourhood and as far away as the United States. Russian officials, on their part, believe Russia is a victim of hybrid warfare originating in the West.

The essential difficulty of confronting most hybrid threats is that they do not play out on the battlefield, but amidst the population ­of the target country – they are designed to infiltrate and disrupt the fabric of civic and social life. Hostile agents are meant to be indistinguishable from civilians. They can be armed infiltrators wearing cargo pants, sneakers and backpacks, as in the Mumbai attacks ten years ago, or malicious instigators on Facebook pages.

No stranger to controversy ::

In the past year, the army chief has made other controversial remarks, pushing the boundary between military and civilian-government prerogatives in response to perceived hybrid threats.

In January of 2018, he accused government schools in Kashmir of breeding separatist sentiments (“If you go to any Kashmir school you will find two maps — one of India and the other of J&K. Why should there be a separate map of J&K!”) and recommended that education in the state be reformed.

Just a few weeks later, he declared that illegal migration from Bangladesh was part of a “proxy game… very well played by our western neighbour [Pakistan], supported by our northern border [China] to keep the area disturbed.” He also referred directly to a political party, the AIUDF, as a beneficiary of this “proxy dimension of warfare.”

Last year, Gen Rawat was criticised for awarding a medal of commendation to Major Leetul Gogoi – the army officer who courted international controversy by tying a Kashmiri civilian to the bonnet of his jeep – even as the army’s own court of inquiry into his action was underway.


Navy Chief Sunil Lanba on 4-day Russia visit from Monday

Navy Chief Sunil Lanba on 4-day Russia visit from Monday

The Navy chief will hold wide-ranging talks with his Russian counterpart Admiral Vladimir Korolev. File photo

New Delhi, November 25

Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Sunil Lanba will begin a four-day visit to Russia on Monday with an aim to explore new avenues for the already close defence ties between the two countries, officials said on Sunday.

The Navy chief will hold wide-ranging talks with his Russian counterpart Admiral Vladimir Korolev and meet a number of top military officials including General VV Gerasimov, Chief of General Staff and First Deputy Defence Minister of Russia, they said.

“The visit aims to consolidate bilateral defence relations with Russia, as also to explore new avenues for defence cooperation,” Navy Spokesperson Capt. D K Sharma said.

Adm. Lanba’s visit to Russia comes around a week after the two countries signed a USD 500 million deal for construction of two missile frigates in Goa for the Indian Navy.

Under the deal, Russia will provide design, technology know how and key materials to Goa Shipyard Ltd. for the construction of the ships in India.

Adm. Lanba is also scheduled to visit the Nakhimov Naval School and Admiralty Shipyard.

He will also visit the Military Academy of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and deliver a talk on “Indian Navy’s Perspective on Maritime Security”, Capt. Sharma said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin visited India last month during which both sides had decided to further ramp up bilateral defence and security cooperation.

India is going ahead with mega defence deals with Russia disregarding warnings by the US of sanctions. The Trump administration has put several Russian firms under sanctions under Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).

The US said countries engaged with Russia’s defence firms may also face actions under CAATSA. India has been hoping to get a waiver from the US on the deals with Russia.

Russia has been India’s largest defence supplier. The bilateral defence and security cooperation has been on an upswing over the last few years. The Indian and Russian navies cooperate on many fronts, including operational interactions and training.

The Indian Navy and the Russian Navy have been conducting the bilateral Maritime Exercise ‘INDRA NAVY’, since 2003 and INDRA Tri-Services Exercise since 2017. PTI


HEROES MANIFEST BRAVERY AND HUMILITY

Brigadier Kuldip Singh Chandpuri (retd), war hero and lovable soul, has fallen to the ravages of time and a dreaded ailment which even he could not combat. His life and times were such that from humble beginnings he went on to become a household name, especially when his daring war time feat was memorably portrayed in the film Border. Sunny Deol essayed the role of the then Major Chandpuri who successfully battled enemy forces in the battle of Longewala when he and his men had hardly a hope of survival.

PHOTO COURTESY FAMILY ALBUMS■ The hero of the historic Battle of Longewala, Maha Vir Chakra winner, late Brig Kuldip Singh Chandpuri .Brig Chandpuri was a national icon and his demise has been mourned by all sections of society. But only those who knew Brig Chandpuri personally understood the true stature of this humble hero. Whenever I met him he would be full of positivity and cheer. He would address many like me as ‘sir’ despite our protests. His laughter was an uninhibited guffaw, with charm and sincerity gushing forth from his being. I have often told his elder son Hardeep that I felt truly inspired by the great man.

I fondly recall the occasion when he and I were fellow judges for a national level competition. He exemplified tireless grace in the long hours during which we deliberated upon the merits of potential winners.

His persona held a disarming charm which was old world and dignified, with nary an indication of his valorous past. He was harmless and genial, hardly the sort of man who could be expected to kill, even in war. Yet, his bravery and doggedness in uniform is the stuff of legends.

Last year, he called me up from a government office where he had gone to sort out some paperwork. He was apparently sitting in the PA’s office waiting for the Sahib to summon him inwards to his cabin. Such was Brig Chandpuri’s humility that instead of feeling riled he was rather apologetic about the whole thing. As if the government was doing him a favour by providing him a service to which he was entitled!

Humility actually runs in the family. Hardeep Chandpuri is the doyen of radio jockeying in this region and runs a training institute for RJs. He too is the epitome of simplicity.

Real life heroes are obviously brave and accomplished people. But what really sets them apart is the inner calmness and humbleness which they possess. Common citizens who save lives by diving into a river or rushing into a building on fire seldom boast about their feats later. They play with fire as if it is their bounden duty to do so. They are usually grounded, sincere and level headed people. Very few acts of bravery or selfless service come from the pompous and high-headed.

Those who crave for mileage and awards are perhaps lesser mortals, not having understood the fact that true following comes from intrinsic mettle and a down to earth approach to life. Flashes in the pan are common these days. Two minutes of fame is easy to attain with digital media spewing forth in viral fashion whatever it considers transiently worthy.

But true champions, heroes who have saved or changed lives, never seek glory. Goodwill comes to them in constant unstoppable showers, like a pleasant drizzle which never ends. The memory of a fallen soldier who sacrificed his life for the nation, or of a fearless fireman who saved dozens but perished himself, can never fade away.

Young people growing up in this highly materialistic era would do well to read about and try to emulate the qualities exemplified by inspiring personalities. They need to be motivated like never before. Otherwise they will end up being the cynical sorts who couldn’t care less.

The heroism of a tireless and spotless official who gives his entire life for the nation but hardly considers himself worthy of any praise, stating that it is only his duty to do so, should also inspire us all.

On humility, Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “A great man is always willing to be little!” When angelic heroes like Brig Chandpuri choose to leave the world, they leave behind a glowing aura which refuses to fade away and leaves us feeling embalmed and grateful.


Anil Ambani’s Reliance Sues NDTV For 10,000 Crores For Rafale Coverage

NDTV has been sued for 10,000 crores by Anil Ambani’s Reliance Group in a court in Ahmedabad for its reportage on the Rafale fighter jet deal. The hearing has been listed for October 26th and NDTV will argue that the charges of defamation are nothing more than a heavy-handed attempt by Anil Ambani’s group to suppress the facts and prevent the media from doing its job – asking questions about a defence deal and seeking answers that are very much in public interest.

The lawsuit is filed against NDTV’s weekly show, Truth vs Hype, which aired on September 29. Top executives of Reliance ignored repeated, multiple and written requests to appear on the show or comment on what is being widely discussed not just in India but in France as well – whether Anil Ambani’s Reliance was transparently chosen as the partner for Dassault in a deal that saw India buying 36 fighter jets.

Remember that just days before this show aired, the role of Reliance appeared to have been questioned by none other than Francois Hollande, who was the president of France when the deal was struck. The NDTV show reported all sides of the story including Dassault’s denial that it had been under any pressure to select Reliance. The panellists, in a balanced discussion, examined whether issues like Reliance’s vast debt and record in defence manufacturing made it a suitable choice for Dassault in India.

As the Rafale deal has become a larger news story in India, the Reliance group has been on a notice-serving spree; to sue a news company for 10,000 crores in a court in Gujarat on false and frivolous charges, ignoring facts that are widely reported everywhere and not just by NDTV, can only be interpreted as an unsophisticated warning to the media to stop doing its job.

NDTV outright rejects any charges of defamation and will present material in court to support its case. As a news organisation, we are committed to independent and fair journalism that uncovers the truth.

 


Opening Kartarpur corridor Surprising India, Pak agrees. But details will define pact

Opening Kartarpur corridor

The eve of the start of year-long celebrations to mark Guru Nanak’s 550th birth anniversary started on a fortuitous note for Indo-Pak ties. In India, the Union Cabinet decided to do up the road that leads to the international border (IB) on the way to Gurdwara Kartarpur Sahib where Guru Nanak spent 18 years. Pakistan, a day earlier, announced that PM Imran Khan will perform the ground-breaking ceremony for the corridor on the Pakistan side. Since it is a short hop to Gurdwara Kartarpur Sahib from the IB, it is a commentary on the state of Indo-Pak ties that the proposal for easy passage for Indian Sikh pilgrims has been hanging fire since Benazir Bhutto first proposed a visa-free corridor in 1996.

Yet the clouds have not lifted. The taste of the pudding is in operationalising the corridor. The tough words being spoken instead of cultivated graciousness that such occasions demand indicate a period of hard bargaining ahead. India has taken a maximalist approach by seeking no restriction on pilgrims and demanding the corridor be kept open not just on special occasions but 365 days. The tandem announcement by both countries on beautifying the corridor shows that though overt diplomatic contact is minimal, back channels are active. They need to ensure that the details that are to be negotiated for a spiritual journey do not become a victim to hawkish stance on matters of state.

In inter-state relations, reciprocity defines the success of most initiatives. India is yet to give such indications. It refuted suggestions that the corridor is being planned as a response to a Pakistani proposal though it is obvious that Islamabad’s preferences will dictate the fate of the corridor. This requires India to reciprocate with a matching gesture that promotes people-to-people contacts, say in medical tourism. Indian political leaders of every strain were quick to take political ownership of the initiative. They must similarly sink political differences to take the corridor to fruition by taking provocations such as Referendum 2020 in their stride.


SPECIAL COVERAGE ON HUMANATRIAN GROUNDS ::: FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE : BLOOD DONATON ETC

61 run over on Amritsar rail tracks

Tragedy at Dasehra festivities as onlookers mowed down by train

http://

Amritsar, October 19

As many as 58 persons (61 according to PTI) were killed and over 40 injured on Friday evening after a crowd of Dasehra revellers that had spilled onto railway tracks while watching burning of the Ravana effigy was run over by the 74643 Jalandhar-Amritsar Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) near Joda Phatak area.

At least 300 persons were watching ‘Ravana dahan’ at a ground near the tracks and as the effigy was lit and the fireworks went off, a section of the crowd started retreating towards the tracks where a large number of people were already standing to watch the event, officials said.

Eyewitnesses said two trains arrived from the opposite direction at the same time (the Howrah Mail from Amritsar on the other track), giving little opportunity to people to escape.

Several people were mowed down by one of the trains, they said.

Wails and cries of people filled the air as friends and relatives frantically looked for their near and dear ones. Severed bodies, including of many children, were still lying on the accident site hours after the incident with angry people not allowing authorities to remove them.

http://

http://

It was a heart-rending sight as the dismembered body parts laid strewn on the blood-soaked ground. Many bodies could not be identified.

There was shock and disbelief as panic-stricken people recounted the horror. “I have lost my minor child. I want him back,” an inconsolable mother could be heard.

“Several times we have been requesting the authorities and leaders to take up the issue with railway authorities to slow down the trains near this phatak during Dasehra, but no one has listened,” a local said. Another said people could not hear the sound of the train. — TNS

Rail services suspended

New Delhi: All services on the Jalandhar-Amritsar route remained suspended three hours after the tragedy. A railway official said while some trains are being diverted, many are stationed near Jalandhar. Railway officials termed the dead as “trespassers” and said they were unlikely to get any compensation from the national transporter as they were not passengers. PTI

State mourning today

  • All offices, educational institutions in Punjab to remain closed on Saturday
  • Railways helpline numbers — 0183-2223171, 0183-2564485
  • PM announces Rs 2 lakh for family of dead, Rs 50,000 for the injured
  • MoS, Railways, Manoj Sinha, reached the spot late at night. The train driver, whose identity is withheld, is being questioned

Permission ‘not sought’

Was permission sought and granted to burn Dasehra effigies near the railway tracks? Soon after the tragedy, the MC Commissioner said it wasn’t. The CM said the administration will look into why the effigy was erected next to rail tracks, but MLA Navjot Kaur Sidhu said Dasehra celebrations took place at the spot every year. Railways should have ensured trains slow down, she added. TNS

https://twitter.com/capt_amarinder

DONATION ACCOUNT 

SANJHA MORCHA DECIDED TO DONATE Rs 20000/- AS FINANCIAL AID FOR THOSE KILLED IN UNFORTUNATE RAIL ACCIDENT .  CONSOLIDATED AMOUNT IF RECIEVED WILL BE HANDED OVER TO CM PUNJAB WITH LIST OF THOSE DONATED AND CAME TO PROVIDE RELIEF TO THE FAMILIES IN DISTRESS ESPECIALLY LABOUR CLAS.

DETAILS OF ACCOUNT OF SANJHA MORCHA AS UNDER

Bank Details:
Name Of Account:

Ex-Servicemen Joint Action Front(Sanjha Morcha)
 
Account No: 7386000100000193

Name of Bank: PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

RTGS/IFSC Code(for e transfer): PUNB 0738600
Postal Address of Bank: SCO145,SECTOR 40C CHANDIGARH(U.T)160036

 

Helpline numbers 

The administration has issued a helpline number, 0183-2421050, to enquire about mishap victims. Those who want to donate blood have been called at the Civil Hospital and Guru Nanak Dev Hospital. The helpline numbers for donating blood are 0183-2223171 and 2564485.

Free medical aid

The SGPC swung into action and sent its team to assist in the rescue operation at Jaura Phatak near Golden Avenue. SGPC president Gobind Singh Longowal announced that the injured would get free medical aid at Sri Guru Ram Dass Charitable Hospital in Vallah.


Exclusive: Conflict of Interest in MoD Over Rafale Offsets?

Conflict of Interest

  • “a conflict between the private interests and the official responsibilities of a person in a position of trust” [Merriam-Webster Dictionary]
  • “when an individual or a corporation (either private or governmental) is in a position to exploit his or their own professional or official capacity in some way for personal or corporate benefit.” [OECD]

http://

Also Read : Rafale Row: Did India Get a Bad Government-to-Government Deal?

On 9 June 2016, Prashant Narain Sukul was appointed as Additional Controller General of Defence Accounts (Addl CGDA). The appointment didn’t make news, quite understandably, since it relates to a fairly obscure position in the Ministry of Defence (MoD) that involves auditing and making payments for defence contracts.

When Prashant’s wife Madhulika Sukul was appointed to head the office as CGDA from 1 February 2018, this was also routine enough. They had both served in the Indian Defence Accounts Service since 1982, including postings in junior positions in the CGDA.

So there was no reason to bring to light the fact that the wife-husband duo now occupied the two most senior positions in that office. Prashant’s specific portfolio covering the Air Force raised no eyebrows since he had worked with the Civil Aviation department and the Air Force previously. Madhulika Sukul’s appointment as Financial Adviser (Defence Services) with effect from 31 August 2018, raised no concerns either.

But in the midst of all these routine Defence Ministry appointments, something else also flew under the radar – which perhaps should not have.

http://

Over a decade ago, Prashant’s brother, Shantanu Sukul, had retired from the Navy and become a defence sector lobbyist, who happens to have been working for Anil Ambani’s Reliance defence group since 2015.

An investigation by The Quint and Brut India has discovered that the relationship between these two senior Defence Ministry officials, and a consultant/employee of Reliance’s defence companies, has given rise to a startling potential conflict of interest, particularly in relation to the offset contracts under the Rafale deal.

This claim has been contested by Prashant Sukul (the full text of his response has been included at the end of this article), according to whom, actions were recently taken which prevented such a conflict of interest from arising, and that there is no possibility for this conflict of interest becoming an issue in the future. However, even after factoring these arguments in, several questions remain.

Also Read : Ajit Doval Illegally Negotiated in Rafale Deal: Prashant Bhushan

Why Was There Potential for a Conflict of Interest to Arise out of This Relationship?

The CGDA and Financial Adviser (Defence Services)

Prashant and Madhulika Sukul hold senior positions in the office of the CGDA, and the CGDA heads the Defence Accounts Department (DAD). The DAD is responsible for audit, payment and accounting of all charges relating to the Armed Forces.

The DAD is under the administrative control of the Financial Adviser (Defence Services), which is an extremely important position which combines finance-related work with involvement in achieving a ministry’s goals and objectives. As mentioned earlier, Madhulika Sukul is not only the CGDA, but has also been appointed as Financial Adviser (Defence Services).

Anil Ambani’s Reliance Defence Companies

The potential for conflict of interest from the positions held by the wife-husband duo has arisen because of Shantanu Sukul’s ties to Reliance. Anil Ambani’s Reliance defence companies were mostly incorporated or acquired in early 2015, and have since sought to get involved in government defence contracts.

The most prominent example is of course the Rafale deal, where Reliance is attempting to secure contracts to fulfil the offset obligations under the deal. To this end, Reliance Aerostructure Limited has already formed a joint venture with Dassault called Dassault Reliance Aerospace Limited.

 

 

Shantanu Sukul and Reliance

Shantanu Sukul retired from the Navy as a Commander in 2006 and has worked in the Indian private defence sector since then, mostly with companies associated with Gujarati entrepreneur Nikhil Gandhi. In these roles, he has liaised with the Defence Ministry and helped these companies secure government contracts. In 2015, he was General Manager Naval Systems at Pipavav Defence and Offshore Engineering Company Ltd, which was acquired by Reliance.

According to Shantanu’s own LinkedIn profile (as of the time of the publication of this article), Shantanu Sukul continues to be a consultant for the same company, which has now been renamed Reliance Naval & Engineering Limited. Sources indicate that Shantanu Sukul also works for the broader Reliance defence group as a whole. This is perhaps why an older version of his LinkedIn profile used to indicate that he was employed as ‘DGM, Reliance Defence Ltd’.

Reliance Defence Ltd is one of the key holding companies in the Reliance defence group, owning a number of other companies including Reliance Aerostructure Limited – which, as we’ve mentioned, formed the joint venture with Dassault to secure offset contracts under the Rafale deal.

Interestingly, Shantanu Sukul appears to have removed all references to this position at Reliance Defence Ltd from his LinkedIn profile (including that he ever worked there).

UPDATE: In his responses to our questions, Shantanu Sukul has confirmed that he worked for Reliance Naval & Engineering Limited and Reliance Defence Limited (see the responses at the end of the piece, in particular his responses to questions 1-3) though he claims to have retired from them all in September 2018.

He has claimed that his son created his LinkedIn profile and so he is not aware of what it says, which appears to be his attempt to counter the fact that his own profile indicated he was still employed by Reliance till this morning. He has finally amended his profile to say that he worked at Reliance Naval till September 2018. We will update this further if we receive documentary evidence of his resignation.

Is This Sufficient to Allege a Potential Conflict of Interest?

On a very cursory level, the mere fact that Madhulika and Prashant Sukul hold offices in the government, and Shantanu Sukul works for a company/group that is attempting to work with the government (and on contracts related to government), could be said to imply a potential conflict of interest.

This view could be supported by Rule 4(2)(ii) of the Central Civil Service (Conduct) Rules 1964, under which a bureaucrat is required to inform the government whenever a member of their family accepts employment at any company or firm. This obligation applies regardless of which department the bureaucrat works in, and doesn’t even require the company or firm to have anything to do with the government.

Such an interpretation would have required Prashant and Madhulika Sukul to disclose that Shantanu Sukul had joined Reliance (and even his previous employers for that matter) regardless of their own roles at the exact time. It is understandable, however, that such an interpretation is not necessarily accepted by everyone.

In his response, Prashant Sukul has indicated that they did not inform the government of the jobs taken up over the years by Shantanu Sukul. He notes that over the course of his and Madhulika’s careers, their roles never had any connection to his work, and so no question of disclosing a conflict of interest arose.

What is interesting is that in his response, he notes that there was no question of Madhulika having to disclose anything about Shantanu “until February 2018”, as till then, her work had nothing to do with Rafale or Reliance. In February 2018, Madhulika was appointed as CGDA, and since the Rafale deal involves public money and expenditure for the Armed Forces, she could very well have been involved in aspects of it – a possibility even his own response appears to acknowledge.

Despite this, he notes that Madhulika only made an intimation of a conflict of interest in September 2018, after she had been appointed as Financial Adviser (Defence Services). Madhulika Sukul has not responded to the questions we have sent her, so it is not clear why no disclosure was made between February and September 2018.

In our questions to Prashant, we had specifically asked if he had made any disclosures about his brother but he has rejected the need for this, despite his appointment to the CGDA in June 2016. According to him, in his post as Addl CGDA he does not have anything to do with the Rafale deal or Reliance.

Does the Office of the CGDA Have Anything to do With the Rafale deal or Reliance?

The reason why any of this needs to be reported, however, is because the CGDA does have something to do with the Rafale deal – more specifically, the offset obligations under the deal.

As is known, the manufacturers of the Rafale aircraft and its components have to plough back half of the price of the deal into offset contracts to be performed in India. This is meant to be an alternative to having technology transfers, or making (some) aircraft in India as the original 126 MMRCA deal had intended.

As part of this trade-off, even though these offset contracts will be entered into by private parties, the government has to scrutinise the contracts to see if they’re genuine, and if there is anything irregular about them.

And this is where the CGDA comes in, according to the government’s own response to the Supreme Court. Para 8 of the response on the offset contract process says:

“Post contract, the vendor submits six monthly offset reports and necessary supporting documents to the DOMW. These offset discharge reports are then  independently audited by the Controller General of Defence Accounts (CGDA) to ascertain veracity of the transactions vis-à-vis offset contract. Based on the audit report submitted by the CGDA, offset credits are granted or penalties if applicable are levied.”

What this means is that not only will the CGDA audit all the transactions under the offset contracts, but their reports will also decide penalties or credits for the companies, whether Reliance or its competitors.

What Does This Mean for Madhulika and Prashant Sukul?

Madhulika Sukul’s position as CGDA would mean that when these offset contracts need to be assessed next year, she would need to sign off on the audit reports. Even if she is no longer CGDA at the time, as Financial Adviser (Defence Services), the CGDA is under her administrative control.

Prashant Sukul’s post as Additional CGDA makes him the next most senior officer in the team. Furthermore, his job description on the CGDA’s own website includes “All Matters relating to Air Force/DOA/OF/DRDO/CSD/SFC”. Since he is to deal with matters relating to the Air Force, it is difficult to see how he would not have something to do with audit process.

Since Reliance will be party to some of these offset contracts at least, and are bidding with their partners to secure work, this could mean a potential violation of Rule 4(3) of the Central Civil Service (Conduct) Rules 1964, which says:

“No Government servant shall in the discharge of his official duties deal with any matter or give or sanction any contract to any company or firm … if any member of his family is employed in that company or firm … or if he or any member of his family is interested in such matter or contract in any other manner and the Government servant shall refer every such matter or contract to his official superior and the matter or contract shall thereafter be disposed of according to the instructions of the authority to whom the reference is made.”

This means that not only would Madhulika and Prashant have to inform the authorities about the potential conflict of interest, but steps will also have to be taken to deal by the government to deal with the matters/contracts.

It needs to be emphasised that we are not alleging that any wrongdoing has already been committed by Prashant Sukul or Madhulika Sukul, or to imply that they will necessarily compromise the audit reports when the offset contracts start coming in next year. However, the potential conflict of interest that exists at this point itself – their presence in the CGDA could influence the award of offset contracts as well – and the potential impact this could have next year when the audits begin, cannot be ignored.

In his response, Prashant Sukul has noted that Madhulika Sukul recused herself from all Reliance matters on 19 September 2018, to avoid any conflicts of interest between her and Shantanu, who was still working for Reliance at the time. Since he has not provided us with a copy of the documents and Madhulika Sukul has not responded to us, we cannot verify this information at this point, and so we cannot rule out the possibility that she could play a role in the offset audit process. Also note that she would need to have recused herself from all the audits, not just the ones for Reliance, since they could benefit from how other companies will be audited too.

Prashant Sukul also claims that Shantanu Sukul recently resigned from Reliance, and that the resignation was accepted on 30 September 2018. As mentioned earlier, Shantanu has claimed that he has resigned from any positions he held at Reliance companies. We have sent questions to Reliance to confirm this was the case and will update this story when we receive documentary evidence that demonstrates the same.

If Shantanu Sukul continues to work with Reliance, however, the potential for the conflict of interest will still exist, provided Madhulika and Prashant Sukul retain positions in the CGDA, and/or in Madhulika’s case, she continues to be the Financial Adviser (Defence Services). If they continue in their positions, then appropriate measures will need to be taken to ensure they have nothing to do with the Rafale offset audit process, and recuse themselves from any matter in which Reliance has an interest.

This could be quite difficult to do, since Reliance is not only attempting to involve itself in the Rafale deal offsets, but many other projects with the government.

The Lessons to be Learned

Presuming everything argued by Prashant Sukul and now Shantanu Sukul in their responses is indeed true, this whole situation nevertheless demonstrates some serious problems with the appointments of positions like Madhulika Sukul’s and Prashant Sukul’s, and the system of disclosure of conflicts of interest.

We should definitely not have to be in a position where a potential conflict has been created and post-facto, we have to go through several steps to unravel it: Madhulika’s recusal, Shantanu’s resignation, a government action plan to mitigate the effects, etc.

After all, Shantanu Sukul’s involvement with Reliance was public information well before both Prashant and Madhulika Sukul were appointed to the CGDA (and continued till long after their appointments), and should ideally have been disclosed to the government by the couple at the time. Why are our rules for bureaucrats not clear enough to require this?

The Centre was also well aware of the offset audit process for the Rafale deal before those appointments, which means the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (which comprises the Prime Minister) should have decided against appointing these two particular officials to the CGDA if it had all the information. If they didn’t, this makes our appointments process inefficient.

In the event the government had all these facts in hand and still decided to appoint the Sukuls, we also need to know whether any steps had been put in place to ensure that the potential conflict of interest didn’t become a problem. In particular, there should have been a clear directive that they could not get involved in the audit process.

It would also be interesting to know if the French government and Dassault were at any point of time aware about this potential conflict of interest, given fairly strict European laws on such issues. Dassault in particular could have had cause for concern under the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, depending on how the offsets audit in particular could have played out.

We reached out to the Ministry of Defence, Madhulika Sukul, Prashant Sukul, Shantanu Sukul and Reliance for responses to the questions raised by this story, more than 24 hours before its publication. We received responses from Prashant Sukul and Shantanu Sukul which have been reproduced in their entirety below. We have received no responses from the others till now, and will update the story with their responses as and when we receive them.

Prashant Sukul’s Response

I have gone through the contents of your questionnaire. Do note that in most of the period from 2006 onwards, I have been solely in the civil aviation sector in various appointments and was India’s representative to ICAO in Montreal Canada. I only rejoined the defence sector on my return in 2016. My wife has mostly been in the Finance Ministry from 1995 -2014 and then was on 2 years study leave. After this she was posted in the consumer affairs ministry until February 2018. So there can be no question of any disclosure relating to conflict of interest until then because none of these assignments has anything to do with Rafale or Reliance.

I am still Addl CGDA and have nothing to do with Rafale/Reliance in my present job. My wife who is now FA defence services, upon joining in Sep 2018 had intimated the conflict of interest in that job to the government on the 19th Sep 2018. In that intimation she has recused herself from all dealings with Reliance because by then Shantanu Sukul has not yet resigned from his position. Shantanu resignation was accepted on the 30th Sep 2018.

Although Shantanu has resigned his position from Reliance, my wife continues to recuse herself from all Reliance matters until today.

I, thus, do not see any necessity for your story even if it presents these facts. It will still damage our reputation and we will have to take legal recourse in that event. It sensationalises an occurrence that did never take place. As regards Mr Sule we are completely unaware of the position.

Shantanu Sukul’s Formal Response

Please find below my response in-line:

  • Are you currently working as or have you ever worked as a consultant for Reliance Naval and Engineering Limited? – Currently not working, resigned since September 2018
  • Are you currently working as or have you ever worked as a consultant or employee for Reliance Defence Limited? If you are no longer working for them, please indicate when you stopped working for them.- refer to point 1
  • Are you currently working as or have you ever worked as a consultant or employee for any other company within Reliance defence group or any other company whose ultimate holding company is Reliance Infrastructure Limited or Reliance Defence Limited? – no (your question is repeated, please refer to point 1)
  • Why did you remove all references to a position at “Reliance Defence Ltd” from an earlier version of your LinkedIn profile? – My son made my LinkedIn profile, I’m clearly not tech savvy unlike you youngsters
  • Has your brother Prashant Narain Sukul ever filed a disclosure in respect of your employment with the Union of India/ the relevant authority under Rule 4(3) of the Central Civil Service (Conduct) Rules 1964 or any other relevant service rules or provision of law? – not my responsibility to know this, but I’m sure he has done it
  • Has your brother’s wife Madhulika Sukul ever filed a disclosure in respect of your employment with the Union of India/ the relevant authority under Rule 4(3) of the Central Civil Service (Conduct) Rules 1964 or any other relevant service rules or provision of law? – not my responsibility to know this, but I’m sure she has done it

I was in the Indian Navy and handled only shipbuilding cases. I had nothing to do with aircraft acquisitions ever. This fact should have been confirmed by you prior to going to print. You should have called me on phone to verify these details rather than resorting to guesswork. What was the tearing hurry to print this, without adequate information. Please note that I hardly check my emails, hence 24 hrs is inadequate and a 50+ like me needs a week’s notice.

I’ve given you all my replies now so how can you state that I refused to answer your queries?

Please remove the article from your page and offer an apology to me and my family. Please let me reiterate that I’d like to end this controversy without any legal action from my side.

(This story has been published as part of an investigation by The Quint and Brut India)

(The Quint is now on WhatsApp. To receive handpicked stories on topics you care about, subscribe to our WhatsApp services. Just go to TheQuint.com/WhatsApp and hit the Subscribe button.)