Opposition parties have consistently alleged corruption in the deal

File photo of a Rafale fighter jet.

Ravi S Singh
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, July 5

The controversy and political polemics on Union government’s purchase of 36 Rafale jet fighters from France gathered storm ahead of Parliament’s Winter Session with BSP chief Mayawati on Monday asking the government to come clean on the matter.

The Opposition parties have consistently alleged corruption in the deal. They had targeted Prime Minister Narendra Modi. 

Congress and Left parties have made a fresh demand for a probe into the Rafale purchase deal by a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) in light of French government instituting a Judicial Commission to probe into allegations of corruption in the Rafale deal.

The Congress and the CPI(M) have given broad hints to raise the issue in Parliament during the Monsoon Session.

However, Mayawati took a jibe at the Congress with regard to corruption in arms purchase deals during its regime, making it clear in public perception that her stand on the Rafale was autonomous, and not influenced by it (Congress).

“Probe into the allegations and counter allegations on commissions in purchase of arms for defence is not new, rather it is a new continuation of the same old chapter starting from the Congress regime,” Mayawati tweeted in Hindi.

She added that the present government should come clean on the Rafale deal and put the controversy surrounding it to rest.

“The news of the institution of judicial probe set up by the French government on allegations of corruption in the purchase of Rafale fighter jets by the Indian government has made national and international headlines due to which the issue has become topic of fresh discussions. It would be better if the Union government takes appropriate cognisance of it,” Mayawati added.

Gen Naravane arrived on a two-day visit to the United Kingdom on July 5, the Indian High Commission in London says

Gen MM Naravane. PTI file

London, July 6

Chief of Army Staff Gen MM Naravane has met UK’s Chief of Defence Staff Gen Sir Nicholas Carter and exchanged views on defence cooperation between the two countries.

Gen Naravane arrived on a two-day visit to the United Kingdom on July 5, the Indian High Commission here said in a statement.

During the UK leg of his European tour, Gen Naravane is also scheduled to meet UK Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace and Chief of General Staff General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith.

“General MM Naravane COAS interacted with General Sir Nicholas Carter, Chief of Defence Staff, CDS and exchanged views on bilateral defence cooperation,” Additional Directorate General of Public Information of the Army tweeted on Tuesday.

Earlier, Gen Naravane inspected the Guard of Honour provided by the Grenadier Guards on Horse Guards’ Parade Square as part of his welcome by the British Army.

The Army chief will visit British Army formations and engage on subjects of mutual interest.

During the second leg of his Europe tour on Wednesday and Thursday, Gen Naravane will be holding important discussions with the Chief of Defence Staff and the Chief of Staff of the Italian Army.

“Additionally, the Chief of Army Staff will also inaugurate the Indian Army Memorial in the famous town of Cassino and will be briefed at the Italian Army’s Counter IED Centre of Excellence at Cecchignola, Rome,” the Indian Army had said in a pre-visit statement. PTI

Gen Naravane has arrived on a visit to the United Kingdom from July 5 to 6, the Indian High Commission here said in a statement

Chief of Army Staff Gen MM Naravane. File photo

London, July 5

Chief of Army Staff Gen MM Naravane arrived here for high-level interactions with his UK counterpart and senior military leaders and a tour of the British Army formations during a two-day visit starting on Monday.

During the UK leg of his European tour, Gen Naravane is scheduled to meet UK Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace and the UK’s Chief of Defence Staff General Sir Nick Carter and the Chief of General Staff General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith.

Gen Naravane has arrived on a visit to the United Kingdom from July 5 to 6, the Indian High Commission here said in a statement.

“During his visit, the COAS will interact with the Secretary of State for Defence, Chief of Defence Staff, Chief of General Staff and other dignitaries. He will visit British Army formations and engage on subjects of mutual interest,” the statement reads.

During the second leg of his Europe tour on Wednesday and Thursday, Gen Naravane will be holding important discussions with the Chief of Defence Staff and the Chief of Staff of the Italian Army.

“Additionally, the Chief of Army Staff will also inaugurate the Indian Army Memorial in the famous town of Cassino and will be briefed at the Italian Army’s Counter IED Centre of Excellence at Cecchignola, Rome,” the Indian Army had said in a pre-visit statement. PTI

Manish Tewari

The current commentary is about this distinctive organisation that lies at the heart of an emerging system of global dominance News.The Communist Party of China (CPC) celebrated a hundred years of its existence on the 1st of July. (AFP Photo)

This July, I complete a four-decade-long association with the Indian National Congress (INC) founded in 1885. An involvement that commenced when I joined the National Students Union of India (NSUI) way back in 1981.

As a grassroots political activist, the philosophy, structure and organisation of other political parties has always been an area of academic interest for me. A curiosity that got further buoyed when I was elected president of the International Students Union (IUS) in the early 1990s. The IUS was then a Prague-based syndical organisation of 155 student organisations across 112 countries and territories. One political party that I have continuously studied and observed is the Communist Party of China (CPC)

The current commentary is about this distinctive organisation that lies at the heart of an emerging system of global dominance. The Communist Party of China (CPC) celebrated a hundred years of its existence on the 1st of July. Ironically, all empirical evidence puts its foundation date as July 23, 1921. July 1 was arbitrarily chosen by party apparatchiks when they were hunkering down in the grottoes of Yan’an in 1941.

The CPC was born during what the Chinese call the century of humiliation 1839-1949. China was back then an impoverished and a pastoral society dominated by imperialist powers through ignominious treaty arrangements.
A clandestine get-together of a handful of people took place in the French concession of Shanghai at 106 Rue Wantz. One of the attendees was Mao Zedong who remained a leading light of this fledgling party for over 54 years. In addition to him, two foreign commissars from the Communist International, a Soviet sponsored structure created for the global spread of Communism, were also present.

These furtive conversations were the precursor to the formal launch of the Chinese Communist Party (CPC). A century later not only does it control China with an iron fist, hitherto considered ungovernable for centuries together, but moreover, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union on the 26th of December, 1991, it is the only political system that presents a successful alternative politico-economic model to the Western neo-liberal democratic order.  

In the early 1920s, all kinds of congregations and individuals called themselves Communists in China. It was a fashionable nom de guerre. This new outfit was bedraggled and thinly resourced. They had no arsenal worth the name.
Even in their wildest imagination no keen observer of China back then could have prophesised that this motley collection of virtual nobodies would ignite a successful Communist insurgency that then spread across the countryside like a wildfire consuming everything in its path.  

In a short span of 28 years, this human dynamo not only vanquished a Nationalist Army of more than four million strong kitted out by the Allied forces to fight the Japanese during World War-II but established and consolidated a Communist state in 1949 that no one believed would survive more than a few years.  

For the longest time, the CPC and the Red Army was led by Mao Zedong who, ironically, had never intellectually devoured Marxism. He was tempered in the fury of the May 4, 1919, struggle. A movement triggered by the pronouncement of Western powers to transfer Chinese colonial territory in the possession of Germany to Japan post World War I. That effort stimulated both anti-Western nationalism as well as a Chinese desire to reclaim the glory of its yesteryears — a la Middle Kingdom syndrome. It also established a distinctive ideological basis that fused Chinese nationalism with Marxism.

The skill of the CPC and the reason for its longevity has been its ability to navigate the winds of change with nimbleness, without giving up on its core ideological values. Over a century, it has morphed from being a revolutionary army to a party of governance surviving the vicissitudes of not only domestic turmoil but also international intrigue coupled with the idiosyncratic impulses of its own leadership.

Two of those whims were the Great Leap Forward from 1958 to 1962 and the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976. The former resulted in the deaths of over 20 million people mainly due to starvation. The latter was a vicious socio-political housecleaning predicated upon the purging the vestiges of capitalist and traditional elements from the mainstream of China’s thought leadership. Mobs of pupils and Red Guards assaulted people wearing “bourgeois clothes” on the thoroughfares, “imperialist” signage were desecrated, and intellectuals and party officials were either murdered or driven to suicide. Over two million lost their lives as a consequence of these depredations.

Mao Zedong’s ruinous tenure ended with his demise in 1976 leaving China in a state of economic morass and social stratification. However, despite the misery and pain Mao had heaped on the Chinese people, the hold of the CPC on the country remained intact. It did not get undermined even after the Tiananmen Square massacre of protesting students in 1989 that convulsed Chinese society to its very being. The point being that it is not only fear, terror and intimidation that binds the Chinese society to the CPC. The impulses are much more profound and include rigorous ideological indoctrination coupled with a village to national capital structure that functions like a well-oiled machine.

The CPC moved seamlessly from Mao’s tyranny to the model of totalitarian capitalism institutionalised by Deng Xiaoping and his successors that held the field for close to three-and-a-half decades from 1979 to 2012. One of the essential attributes of those years was the cultivated reticence of both the Chinese state and the CPC as it put its shoulder to the wheel of internal consolidation. It once again morphed into an aggressive wolf warrior mode as Xi Jinping took centrestage in 2012.

The beauty of these transitions does not lie in the abrupt U-turns that the CPC took but the fact that they were able to carry the Chinese nation along with them during all these transfigurations.

That is wherein lies the challenge for Indian policymakers as they seek to understand Chinese motivations and behaviour in the 21st century. Till the time they do not understand the functioning of the CPC they will never be able to discern the minds and methods of the Chinese leadership. For, unlike India and other democracies around the world, where political parties and governance systems are distinct, in the case of China, it is a merged mass of dissimulating narratives.

The author is a lawyer, Member of Parliament and former Union information and broadcasting minister. The views expressed are personal. Twitter handle @manishtewari.

Tags: indian national congress, national students union of india, communist party of china

Simmering differences over India’s military reform burst into the open on July 2. Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Bipin Rawat called the Indian Air Force (IAF) a ‘support arm’. “The air force is required to provide support to the ground forces,” General Rawat said, speaking at a webinar organised by the Global Counter Terrorism Council. This came as a rude shock to the IAF whose 2012 doctrine prioritises destroying the enemy’s air assets over hitting targets on the ground. It lists counter air campaign and counter surface force campaigns, in that order, as two of its strategic aims. Counter air means destroying the enemy’s fighter aircraft and counter surface includes, among other tasks, flying bombing missions in support of the army.
IAF chief Air Chief Marshal RKS. Bhadauria wisely refrained from joining the issue with the CDS saying the IAF had an important role. Both the CDS and the air chief repeated their statements in interviews to India Today television later in the day. “Do not forget that the IAF continues to remain a supporting arm just as artillery support or engineers support the combatant arm in the army. They will be a supporting arm,” General Bipin Rawat told India Today.
General Rawat’s statement has triggered off dismay in the IAF which enters the 90th year of its creation this October. The IAF has always feared becoming the army’s air artillery, tethered to ground support duties. The CDS is worried that the IAF’s obduracy may delay the creation of the theatre commands. ‘Differing perceptions about (air power) are old as air power itself. But the place to discuss it is the elegant teak-panelled Chiefs of Staff Committee room in South Block. Not in TV studios,” the former navy chief Admiral Arun Prakash tweeted on July 3.
In ‘Defence from the Skies’, his 2007 book on the IAF, one of the service’s foremost minds, the late Air Commodore Jasjit Singh explained the IAF’s solitary nature. It is, he explains, ‘based on the reality that air power can interfere with and affect the functioning and operations of land and naval forces. The nature of the medium is such that the reverse is not true.’
The IAF’s headquarters at the Vayu Sena Bhavan epitomises this standalone nature. It sits 400 metres away from South Block, which houses the CDS and the two other service chiefs. The IAF’s independence could run at variance with the government’s plan to set up military theatres by 2023. The government plans to pare down the existing 17 single-service commands to just four or five military theatres where all the three services will train and fight together. For the IAF, sharing turf with the army and the navy in theatre commands, or worse, losing its precious fighters to them, is anathema. But the anger over General Rawat’s statement bubbled over in WhatsApp groups, IAF veterans worried over what lay in store after August 15, 2021, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is expected to announce the creation of an integrated air defence command (IADC) and an integrated maritime theatre command (IMTC). The IADC will be headed by an IAF three-star officer when it is established on or around August 15, 2022, and the IMTC by a three-star naval officer. The bigger battle lies ahead in the creation of the western and eastern theatre commands by 2023. These two land-centric commands will subsume a bulk of the IAF’s four combat commands. This will require the defence ministry to handle the IAF’s concerns, some of them justified, with greater sensitivity.
Defence Minister Rajnath Singh needs to intervene and bring the air force on board with the reform. The last thing the country needs is a sulking service.
This is especially necessary because India’s military reforms are being driven by the political executive. Left to themselves, it can be safely said, the services would never integrate with each other. This is true of any democracy that has attempted military integration. The US political class, after decades of debate, enshrined its reform in the landmark Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986. India has chosen the executive decision route. India’s historic military reforms are commendable, especially because they have zero political appeal and the reason why politicians have been content to let the military do its own thing. The result is that the three services have operated in silos where each trains and plans to fight and win wars independently and has built a powerful raison d’etre. Building a consensus, hence, can be elusive. As late as 2018, the IAF had shot down the idea of theatre commands. The three services could only agree on a weaker but more acceptable permanent Chairman Chiefs of Staff Committee rather than a CDS. The government’s 2019 decision to appoint a powerful CDS with a sweeping mandate was hence a surprise even for the services.

Many issues and questions around theatre commands collided furiously when General Bipin Rawat, the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), gave an interview to a television channel on 2 July.
There is a mighty war raging across India, and it is called ‘Theaterisation’. The legions of this epic conflict are filled with countless sturdy belligerents, who strike to cut through the battle ranks of cyberspace, with the dash of an Alexander at Gaugamela, a Zhukov at Kursk, or a Harbaksh Singh at Asal Uttar.
But who exactly is fighting whom, and why, is not too clear.
The crux of the clash lies in an ongoing transformational military process being devised by the Indian government — the administrative and operational amalgamation of the three services into integrated commands, whereby, the army, the navy and the air force would function in synchrony, in different, geographically well-defined theatres of activity, under one hat, to achieve specified political objectives.
As an organisational concept, then, Theaterisation makes perfect sense, because it cuts costs, optimizes resources, improves focus of charter, prevents duplication, reduces response times, enhances mobility, dovetails disparate logistics, consolidates material requirements, and holistically melds olive, blue and white into the grey steel of a single, deadly blade.
Indeed, some large militaries of the world have already implemented this concept successfully, and made Theaterisation the new benchmark for efficiency. This transformation becomes all the more necessary in the present age, in which, there is a higher probability of a lethal threat being issued by the click of a mouse, or upon an un-manned platform, than from the barrel of a rifle.
That is the extent to which remote sensing, emergent technologies, and digitalization have radically altered the very nature of both threats and warfare. In such a bewildering environment, how does one reconcile a boot on the ground with a guided missile approaching at supersonic velocity, or a fighter jet racing to interdict bandits, with ten lines of surreptitiously-inserted code that could disable its avionics to fatal effect?
What if, surreal as it sounds, a tactic can also function as a strategy?
It is this blurring of traditional lines between threats, responses, services and functions, which has now finally propelled the Indian government to embrace Theaterisation as the way forward. But, there are multiple issues which need to be resolved, before this truly historic transformation of the Indian military is achieved.
This is where the acrimony and belligerence outlined at the start comes in.
Part of the problem is organisational, and part of it is administrative. How do you get three services with disparate styles of functioning to work as one? How do you define a theatre? What is the optimal degree of multi-service integration required in a particular theatre? Who would report to whom? Does anyone understand that a binary approach to solutions will not work?
Will our security be compromised if this process is executed without due application of mind? Have we thought things through enough? How much of this debate can take place in the public domain without hurting national interests?
And what do we do when the issue gets severely politicized? (You can bet it will, because this is India, and we are like this only) All of these questions, and many more, collided furiously when General Bipin Rawat, the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), gave an interview to a television channel on 2 July.
With it, a complex debate on Theaterisation was swiftly reduced to two main points of perceived concern: a demotion of the Indian Air Force, and an emasculation of Northern Army Command.
But what exactly did the CDS say to cause such furore, and what is the truth?
First, he said that the entire Indian airspace would be integrated into one Air Defence Command, to counter diverse threats, from drones and artillery shells, to aircraft and missiles.
Second, he said that the security of the Indian Ocean region would be managed by a single Maritime Command, integrating the resources and capabilities the three services, with those of allied agencies like the Coastguard, the provincial coastal police, and central departments handling shipping and hydrology.
Even fishermen would function as their eyes and ears.
Third, pertinently, he said that two separate theatre commands would be set up, to tackle our western adversary (Pakistan), and the one to our north and east (China).
In case of a two-front war (yes, he used those words), resources would be allocated between these two theatres depending upon which one faced the graver challenge.
Fourth, with specific reference to Northern Army Command, the CDS plainly stated that there was already a unified command in place, to tackle both the twin-external threats, and internal security in Jammu and Kashmir.
But, he said, since the situation in that area was extremely fluid right now, with the risk of escalation running high, the Northern Army would, for the time being, remain as a separate Command, in addition to the two new theatre commands being created.
The operative phrase here is ‘for the time being’.
Fifth, he said that ‘the Air Force continues to remain a supporting arm to the armed forces, just like the artillery support…or the engineers’. This is the statement which got some analysts’ goat.
Ironically, the CDS’s statement on the Air Force’s supporting role was in fact only part of two broader points he was making: one, that the concept of theatre commands had already been employed by India during the 1971 war, when land, naval, and airborne assets were under the control of General Arora as he pushed into East Pakistan; and two, that a supporting role to ground forces was one function written into the Air Force’s charter, amongst others, which included the nation’s air defence as well.
Unfortunately, online tumult and agitated headline-hunting took these two separate statements out of context, and merged them into one.
As a result, it now seemed like the CDS had cast the Air Force as a junior service subordinate to the Army (specifically to Northern Army Command, as some inferred), and, that the Northern Army would not receive the manifold benefits of Theaterisation.
These interpretations are incorrect, since the CDS did not even obliquely imply thus, in his interview. Nowhere in the interview did he offer a slight, even inadvertently, to the Air Force.
Rather, he was quite vociferous on the opposite: one, that the existing structure of Northern Army Command would remain intact for the time being, while the two other land based theatre commands were set up around it; and two, that supporting ground forces was just one role of the Air Force, amidst its broader duties of air defence.
In effect, there would be three land-based theatre commands lining our northern mountain chain, plus one maritime and one air defence command; a total of five, which would come down to four when Northern Army Command is eventually subsumed, at some future point of time, by its two neighbouring theatres.
With regard to ‘fears’, that the Air Force’s already-sparse assets were being spread too thin, the CDS nearly rolled his eyes. As he patiently explained, dispersal of air assets is the norm during peacetime; formations assemble in designated sectors only when a threat emerges.
Air Chief Marshal Rakesh Badhauria supplemented this by saying that the Air Force’s reservations — and he candidly admitted that there were a few — would be resolved soon through internal deliberations.
Of course, some may not concur with this, yet it is what it is: if the charter assigned to Northern Army Command includes some elements of the Air Force in a supporting role, and if the political leadership believes that it would be unwise at present, to re-jig the Northern Army’s structure into two different theatres, then, quite frankly, commentators have little option but to defer to such views.
Besides, referring to the process and timelines for Theaterisation, the CDS was clear that he expected service chiefs to revert with firm plans only within a year or so.
It’s not like anything new is going to be implemented in the short term.
Consequently, the jeering Jominis of Jor Bagh, the grumbling Guderians of Greater Kailash, and our crafty Clausewitzs of Koramangala, most of whom can barely tell a rifle from a gun, but are presently outraging over implied snubs by the CDS to the Air Force, and a theatrical Theaterisation, would do well to gain a sense of proportion and smoke the peace pipe, if they are not to create a theatre of the absurd for themselves.

New Delhi: A fresh row broke out Friday between Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Gen Bipin Rawat and Air Chief Marshal (ACM) R.K.S. Bhadauria over the role of the Indian Air Force (IAF) in the planned theatresisation.

While the CDS labeled the IAF as a supporting arm to the ground forces — likening it to the role of artillery and engineers in the Army, the IAF chief said air power has a huge role to play in any of the integrated battle areas and is not an issue of support alone.

ACM Bhadauria also said that the IAF was supportive of the integrated theatre command, but underlined that it is important to “get it right” because it will have an impact on war fighting.

These contrasting statements by two of the most senior Indian military officers came in the backdrop of differences within the Services on the basic structure of theatres, which aim to bring in a joint and integrated approach to war fighting.

The latest row broke out during an online seminar organised by think-tank Global Counter Terrorism Council.

Also read: DRDO says its anti-drone system can help Army prevent Jammu airbase-like attacks

What CDS said on IAF role 

Speaking first, Gen Rawat outlined the concept of theatres and stressed their need.

Asked about reservations expressed by the IAF, which favours one theatre for the entire country instead of several, Gen Rawat said the entire air space of the nation will be looked after by one air defence command.

“We are creating one air defence command which will look after the entire nation’s air space. But what we are looking at, because we have a western theatre and a northern theatre, one dealing with our northern adversary, one dealing with our western adversary, and we are creating land-based theatres for them,” he said.

He said the IAF is not just responsible for air defence, but also has a charter of providing close air support to the land forces when they undertake operations and for offensive air support in case you go into an adversary’s territory.

Similarly, when the Navy is operating, the naval ships or the naval armada also requires air support, the CDS added. “So therefore, in addition to air defence, IAF is also responsible for carrying close air support and offensive air support,” he said.

He said theatre commanders need some kind of air component commander advising them.

Responding to the argument that IAF assets are fewer than required and cannot be split into different theatres, the CDS argued that even today, the entire resources of the air force are not controlled by one agency.

“They have got five operational commands where the entire resources of the air force are distributed. Even today, air force assets are distributed. So we do not understand in case an air defence command is created, will all these air assets go under one commander? I don’t think that is going to happen.

“They are not going to collapse their existing commands. If that is the thought process, they can come forth and say we intend to collapse our five operational commands and we will have one command. Then I think we need to address the entire issue from a different perspective,” he said.

He went on to add that the IAF is required to provide support to the ground forces.

“Do not forget that the Air Force continues to remain a supporting arm to the armed forces just as the artillery or engineer supports the combatant arms in the Army. They will be a supporting arm and they have air defence charter and supporting the ground forces in times of war. This is a basic charter that they will have to understand,” he said.

Also read: India, China should be able to gradually achieve status quo in eastern Ladakh, says CDS Rawat

IAF chief says air power plays huge role

Asked about CDS Rawat comment, ACM Bhadauria said, “It is not a supporting role alone. Air power has a huge role to play in any of the integrated battle areas. It is not an issue of support alone. And there is a whole lot of things that go into any air plan that is made…”

In response to the perception that IAF is being a roadblock in the path towards a unified approach, he said it was “totally incorrect”.

“CDS was also a big reform. CDS has been established. The next big reform is integrated theatre command and it is much more complex. I have said it on record many times before that we are for establishing an integrated theatre command but the issues we have raised in our internal discussions has got to do with how we should do it (structure of theaterisation),” he said.

“We must get it right. It is the most important reform that will have an impact on war fighting,” said the ACM.

“We already have a functional system today. But when we do an integrated theatre command, we should reach the next level of ability to project our comprehensive national power. We should be able to synergise… have more flexibility, we cannot have more boundaries,” he said, but refused to elaborate on IAF’s specific concerns to the media.

He added, “These are all facets of deliberation to get it right. It is not an issue of spanner etc… We are totally committed to theatre command but we must get it right. That is the focus area that we are deliberating between the three service chiefs and the CDS. And that process is continuing.”

(Edited by Amit Upadhyaya)

Also read: Army focuses on bridging capabilities against Pakistan & China, inducts 12 indigenous bridges

New Delhi: The National Financial Prosecutor’s Office (PNF) of France has appointed a judge to investigate “corruption” and “favouritism” suspicions in the 2016 multi-billion dollar deal with India for the purchase of 36 Rafale jets, French media reports said.

In a late night report filed Saturday by French investigative website Mediapart, it said a judicial probe into suspected corruption was opened on 14 June in France over the 7.8-billion-euro Rafale contract of 2016.

French news agency AFP also reported that PNF said a French judge has been tasked with investigating “corruption” suspicions in the deal.

The new probe is an outcome of a series of reports done by Mediapart regarding the deal. Dassault Aviation, the manufacturer of the Rafale aircraft, has denied all corruption allegations.

Based on the reports by Mediapart, Sherpa, an NGO which works in the field giving support to victims of financial crimes, filed a complaint in April with PNF requesting the opening of a judicial investigation for corruption, favoritism and various financial offences likely to have occurred in the context of the sale of 36 combat aircraft manufactured by aviation major Dassault Aviation.

Mediapart had claimed that the Agence Française Anticorruption (AFA) found suspicious payments made to a company linked to a middleman who was arrested by India’s Enforcement Directorate in 2019 in connection with the VVIP chopper scam.

The AFA, set up in 2017 with the aim of checking whether large companies implemented the anti-corruption procedures set out under Sapin 2, the French anti-corruption law, is similar to India’s Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG). However, unlike CAG, the AFA also audits private firms.

Also read: Induction of Rafale aircraft into Indian Air Force to take place by 2022, says IAF Chief

French presidents, ministers under scanner

In its latest report, the Mediapart said that “the criminal investigation opened on June 14 and led by an independent magistrate, an investigating judge, will, among other elements, examine questions surrounding the action of former French President Francois Hollande, who was in office when the Rafale deal was inked, and current French President Emmanuel Macron, who was at that time Hollande’s economy and finance minister, as well as the then defence minister, now foreign affairs minister, Jean Yves Le Drian”.

Sherpa said that its first complaint was filed with PNF in October 2018 to bring to attention “facts which, in our opinion, should have justified the opening of an investigation”.

The NGO said it was based on a complaint filed by former Indian Union ministers Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie, and lawyer Prashant Bhushan with the Central Bureau of Investigation.

Earlier this year, Mediapart claimed that the former PNF head, Éliane Houlette, had shelved an investigation into alleged evidence of corruption in the Rafale jet deal despite the objection of colleagues.

It had said Houlette justified her decision to shelve the investigations as preserving “the interests of France, the workings of institutions.”

The Rs 59,000-crore Rafale deal earlier faced controversy in India with the opposition Congress claiming the Narendra Modi government had purchased the jets at an inflated cost and questioning why the offset contract was given to a private firm instead of the public-sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited.

In 2019, India’s Supreme Court had dismissed a batch of review petitions seeking a probe into the government’s procurement of the 36 fighter jets from France, saying there was no ground to order an FIR into the case.

(Edited by Manasa Mohan)

Also read: Why Manohar Parrikar’s biggest contribution to Defence Ministry was breaking Rafale logjam

During the four-day visit to UK and Italy, the Chief of Army Staff will be meeting his counterparts and senior military leaders with the aim of enhancing India’s defence cooperation.

New Delhi: Chief of Army Staff (COAS), General MM Naravane will embark on a four-day visit to the United Kingdom and Italy from July 5 to 8.

He will be inaugurating the Indian Army Memorial in the famous town of Cassino and will be briefed at the Italian Army’s Counter IED Centre of Excellence at Cecchingola, Rome.

As per the Ministry of Defence, during the four-day visit, he will be meeting his counterparts and senior military leaders of these countries with an aim of enhancing India’s defence cooperation.

His visit to the United Kingdom is scheduled for two days (July 5 and 6) during which the COAS will interact with the Secretary of State for Defence, Chief of Defence Staff, Chief of General Staff and other dignitaries.

He will also be visiting various army formations where he will exchange ideas on issues of mutual interest.

During the second leg of his tour (July 7 and 8), the Army Chief will be holding important discussions with the Chief of Defence Staff and Chief of Staff of the Italian Army.

Also read: Drones pose new challenge, more state and non-state actors will use them: Army chief Naravane

The MVC recipients: Brig (later Maj Gen) HS Kler and (right) Brig (later Lt Gen) Anand Sarup.

Lt Col Dilbag Singh Dabas (Retd)

Chakra awards are associated with the bravery displayed in the face of the enemy. During war, the senior-level commanders’ primary role is planning of operations based on overall strategy and for that they need not be personally facing the enemy. They perform the most challenging tasks by formulating operational plans sufficiently simple and flexible for the junior commanders and leaders to execute.

A military operation seldom proceeds as planned because the enemy’s reaction can never be factored in since his representative wouldn’t be on board while planning. During execution, the senior commanders follow minute-to-minute progress of the battle and should the execution get stalled or even boomerangs, take on-the-spot decisions to ensure success. They are not just responsible but also accountable for the successes as well as failures. By shouldering such huge responsibility, and being accountable for the outcomes, are they any less Virs or Maha Virs?

Brigadier Hardev Singh Kler, AVSM, and Brigadier Anand Sarup are among the seven Brigadier-ranked officers awarded the Maha Vir Chakra during the 1971 India-Pakistan war on the eastern front.

Brig Kler, a third generation soldier, belonged to the illustrious Kler family of Kakrala Kalan near Ludhiana. His father Captain Chhajja Singh earned the Order of British India (OBI) award during the Second World War. Hardev, his second son, carried forward the legacy earning the Ati Vishist Seva Medal in the 1965 India-Pakistan war and the Maha Vir Chakra during Operation ‘Cactus Lily’ in 1971, thus becoming the highest decorated Kler in the family.

After graduation from Gordon College, Rawalpindi, Hardev was commissioned into the Corps of Signals in 1943. At 19, he was the youngest Indian to have been commissioned into the British Indian Army. After five mandatory parachute jumps as a volunteer, he was given an option to permanently get seconded to the elite Paratroopers Brigade. Hardev, now a Captain, declined the option, and not without considered reason; Captain Chhajja Singh, his father, had earned all the laurels as a dedicated Signalman and young Hardev preferred following in the footsteps of the senior.

During the 1965 war, Hardev, as Lieutenant Colonel, for his distinguished wartime services rendered during ‘Operation Gibraltar’ was awarded the AVSM, a rare honour for a Lt Col.

During Operation ‘Cactus Lily’, Hardev Kler, now a Brigadier, while commanding 95 Mountain Brigade in the eastern theatre, boldly led the advance with Dhaka as the terminal objective. By December 8, the brigade under his command contacted Jamalpur, strongly held by Pakistan’s 93 Infantry Brigade. The fortress Jamalpur, though encircled, held on even after Brig Kler, through a messenger, urged Lt Col Sultan, the head of Jamalpur Garrison, to surrender. The reply by the Pakistani Col showed that despite the chips going down steadily, the morale of the Pakistani commanders was far from down. Sultan sent back a defiant reply, enclosing a bullet in his letter. The letter reproduced below surely deserves a place in military history.

Dear Brig,

Hope this finds you in high spirits. Thanks for the letter.

We here in Jamalpur are waiting for the fight to commence. It has not started yet. So let us not talk and start it. 40 air sorties, I may point out, are inadequate. Please ask for many more.

Your remark about your messenger being given proper treatment was superfluous. Shows how you underestimate my boys. I hope he liked his tea. Give my love to Muktis.

Hoping to find you with a sten gun in your hand next time, instead of the pen you seem to have so much mastery over.

I am, your most sincerely

[Col Sultan]

Col Sultan, however, was unaware of the fact that when he dispatched the letter, with a 9 mm live bullet enclosed, the 95 Mountain Brigade Group was sitting behind him south of Jamalpur.

During the final assault on Jamalpur by 1 Maratha Light Infantry, Brig Kler advanced along with the forward platoon of the Marathas, with a loaded sten gun in hand. But he could not show to his counterpart that though a Signalman, he was equally proficient in handling the small arms, since on the night of December 10/11, Col Sultan along with Brig Abdul Qadir Khan, Commander of 93 Pakistan Infantry Brigade, together with 31 Baluch had pulled out of Jamalpur and took defences at Tangail 9 km in the rear.

Throughout, Brig Kler remained close to the leading troops and ensured the execution of his plan, without breathing on the neck of the commanding officers.

In recognition of his bold planning, execution and personal conspicuous bravery, Brig Hardev Singh Kler, AVSM, was awarded the Maha Vir Chakra. The citation reads:

“Brigadier Hardev Singh Kler, AVSM, was commanding a mountain brigade on the eastern front. He led the advance of his brigade from Jamalpur up to Turag river. During all the actions in the advance, Brig Kler was personally present with the leading troops and directed the operations with complete disregard to his life. By personally going into the thick of the battle, he provided great inspiration to his troops who had laid siege behind enemy positions south of Jamalpur. Under his command, the brigade inflicted heavy casualties on the enemy and captured 379 prisoners as well as large quantities of weapons and ammunition.”

His son, Flight Lieutenant DJS Kler, also fought the war in the eastern theatre and in the same sector — quite unusual for father and son fighting on the same front.

Brigadier Anand Sarup’s father Khem Chand was a Viceroy Commissioned officer (present day Junior Commissioned Officers), but Anand aspired to be an Indian Commissioned Officer.

After Senior Cambridge from King George’s Royal Military College, Jalandhar, Anand cleared the Indian Military Academy entrance test. Despite communal tension prevailing in Punjab as a fallout of Partition, he made his way from Jalandhar to the Services Selection Centre at Meerut as a stowaway in a vehicle carrying a British Colonel’s luggage. After successfully clearing the selection process, Anand joined the Academy and was commissioned into 8 Gorkha Rifles in 1949.

Just before the 1971 war, Anand Sarup, now a Brigadier and Commandant of the Counter Insurgency & Jungle Warfare School in Mizoram, was handed down the command of an ad hoc establishment named ‘Kilo Force’ created with two regular modified infantry battalions (31 Jat and 32 Mahar, present day 12 Jat and 15 Mahar) from Mizo Hills, 4th and 10th East Bengal Battalions, 92nd BSF battalion, one CRP battalion, one Mukti Fauj battalion, an artillery mountain regiment, Mujib artillery battery and a BSF Post Group.

Within a fortnight of the raising of the ad hoc force, after intensive yet planned joint training, Brig Sarup welded 5,000 to 6,000 men under his command into a cohesive fighting force. At the outbreak of war, ‘K’ force was launched into the battle from its firm base in Mizoram near East Pakistan border.

After declaration of the war on December 3, the Kilo Force surged forward. After winning over some hard skirmishes en route, the hot pursuit got stalled at Feni town, which was strongly defended by two enemy companies. Feni was a tactically important road and rail route to Chittagong harbour and needed to be captured to cut off the harbour from the rest of East Pakistan. Based on a reconnaissance report, Brig Sarup formulated a bold plan and by December 6, Feni was captured.

The force also captured and occupied Karrehat and Zorarganj by December 8 and commenced its advance to Chittagong. To speed up the capture of Chittagong, Kilo Force was reinforced with 83 Mountain Brigade under the overall command of Brig Sarup. After fighting through and clearing Kumarighat held strongly by two enemy companies, 15 Baluch and 25 Frontier Force, Kilo Force reached Faujdahat on the outskirts of Chittagong on the night of December 13/14 when operations were suspended.

At Faujdahat, the force, under the dynamic leadership of Brig Sarup, intercepted the enemy’s withdrawal and captured almost a battalion size of Prisoners of War and a great amount of arms and ammunition. The aggressive role played by the ‘K’ force contributed a lot in the Indian Army’s comprehensive and early victory on the eastern front.

During the entire operation, Brig Sarup, for his bold planning, outstanding leadership and conspicuous bravery, was awarded the Maha Vir Chakra. The battle account on his award reads:

“Brigadier Anand Sarup was allotted the task of organising and launching into battle an ad hoc force for engaging the enemy at Pathanagar and in the area north of Feni town in eastern theatre. He organised and trained this force in a very short period and the troops under his command fought gallantly during the battles at Feni, Nazirhat, Kumarighat and Faujdahat. During the operations, Brig Sarup was constantly on the move, well forward with his troops, directing the operations. Under his leadership, the capture of Feni isolated the Chittagong harbour, which negated the war effort of Pakistan to a great extent. Capture of strongly held Kumarighat defended locality was truly the hallmark of the bold and innovative planning by Brig Sarup and equally bold execution by the troops under his command.”

Both the Maha Virs superannuated as General Officers.

To make the wartime decorations for the middle and senior-level commanders appear more realistic and down to earth, during IPKF operations in Sri Lanka in 1987, Yudh Seva Medals (Yudh Seva Medal, Uttam Yudh Seva Medal and Sarvottam Yudh Seva Medal) were instituted. The aim was to acknowledge the wartime distinguished services rendered by them, the services that carry a huge burden of responsibility and accountability irrespective of their not being in the face of the enemy.