'Mindshare' of Indian Civil Society

Indian Military has been 'combating' insurgency and terrorism in India since its independence. Methodology adopted by it to combat this 'indigenous unrest' has been unique and almost unparalleled; that's how it should be when You are 'controlling' unrest within Your own country, initiated by Your own countrymen. All the time the effort is to get 'them' in the mainstream.

Lt Gen Vijay Oberoi's recent Article in the Tribune 'Army’s role is conflict management, not resolution' should be read in this context.

He writes, "Regular forces usually fail to grasp the essentially political nature of the conflict. Nor do they understand the limits of their own conventional military power in such political and operational settings. A major characteristic of such operations in our country is application of combat power to enhance "civil control" rather than cause attrition. In this respect the Indian Army is quite different from many others, including those of USA and Pakistan."

He further goes on to say, "The Indian Army believes such operations need to be people-centric and conducted in a manner that they generate a groundswell for stability and peace. Rules of engagement are formulated imaginatively in the backdrop of political, legal and moral parameters. The populace constitutes the "centre of gravity" and therefore winning their "hearts and minds" is central to all efforts. Effective interface with media, as part of public information and perception-management, is also necessary. "

Read the full Article: Mindshare of Indian Civil Society

Does it bear on the Civil-Military Relations?

Sukhwindar

Talkative Generals of India

AG Noorani's Article ‘Talkative Generals’ is interesting. He avers, “President Obama's dismissal of General Stanley A. McChrystal from his command in Afghanistan, for speaking to the media in intemperate language, is in the sound tradition of democratic governance”……“It flows from the fundamental principle of civilian supremacy over the military”. He further writes, “even in Communist China, Chairman Mao Zedong pithily prescribed that the party directed the gun”.

No one in the Indian Military ever thinks that ‘democracy is not supreme’. Democracy in India is all set to flourish and thrive with support from all limbs of the Govt. The concern in the Indian CMR is not to ‘disturb the balance’ achieved so far, and also arrest any tendencies simultaneously that may erupt to cause any imbalance. Civil-Military both have a pious role in this.

It is hard to think that at senior levels where strategy, professionalism, and nationalism are expected to be at its peak, we can really lay down any “do’s and don’ts” in very specific terms. Let Us NOT ‘chain’ the minds of the Generals – ultimately to whose advantage! ‘Systems Approach’ is needed. Yes, Civil-Military-Civil Marayada should be maintained jealously.

Dynamism of the democratic model is such that it is self-correcting to a point; let Us call it a ‘CMR Threshold’. It should not be crossed, once crossed the Govt. needs to apply the ‘corrective therapy’ – it is applicable both for Civil and Military.

Noorani’s Article records major events in India’s CMR. To that extent it interests the Chair. Pse read the full Article: Talkative Generals of India.

Svipja Technologies

India to Learn How US Integrates It’s Military Leadership into the ‘System’ to Promote US National Aims & Objectives

We need to assimilate nuances of CMR in the shortest possible time, lot has been missed since independence. US CMR could be one example to develop Indian Model of the CMR. Study of UK Model may not be very apt.

Just Note how well articulated recent visit of The Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, was in the scheme of the US:

India to Learn How US Integrates It’s Military Leadership into the ‘System’ to Promote US National Aims & Objectives

CMR as a 'System' in the Indian Context has a lot to offer. We need to shed protecting our 'turfs' for the national good. All our intellectuals should see the Relations holistically much beyond our tainted sights; this is applicable to both civil and military leadership.

SvipjaCMRChair
Svipja Technologies

Need to Understand Military

“It is an irony that expressing an independent view by the Indian Armed Forces is sometimes being viewed as defiance of the system. …..In the 21st century, it is important to factor in the changing geopolitical realities to appreciate the compulsions of civilian and military setups working under democratic structures.” says Ajey in his Article.

“No security problem could have only a military solution. Modern day problems demand solutions at the political and social levels too” Ajey avers.

Read the Article: Need to Understand Military

We feel that Civil-Military though independent entities need ‘Systems Approach’ to deliver excellence in India, and for that matter anywhere. ‘Tight tasking’ is well understood at tactical levels, but not at strategic levels. We are all Indians and the Armed Forces are of free India. We should shed colonial past. We should have a System to harness the available talent without diluting primary task; after all Military Leaders are exposed widely to strategy.

Svipja CMR Chair
Courtesy: IDSA, India, www.idsa.in

Some 'Special' Issues of Civil-Military Relations

The Study and Research on CMR is one area of neglect in India. The classic work on the theory of CMR by Samuel Huntington (The Soldier and the State, 1959) is an example, though ‘old’ in a way. This work is one way of thinking about CMR. It had two assumptions. First, it assumed that CMR in any society should be studied as a system composed of interdependent elements. The second was that ‘objective civilian control’ maximizes military security. The assumptions are fully valid even today, but the Study needs to be developed further in the Indian Conditions.

Srinath Raghavan of the Centre of Policy Research, New Delhi, in the July 2010, in it’s special issue of the Monthly Journal Seminar commented that matters of operational issues, and the leading role being played by the Services impact CMR. Civil Society and 24x7 Media causes civil interference to the detriment of CMR.

Gautam observes that the topic is just not about the military’s relations with the civil leadership and bureaucracy only, but ‘Massive Import Syndrome’ and related issues in Civil and Military alike, could dilute the CMR for various reasons.

Read the Article: Some Issues of Civil-Military Relations

We feel that we need to take Note of it. The debate on the CMR has not matured well in India.

Svipja CMR Chair aims to harness the intellect in the CMR sphere.

Svipja CMR Chair
Courtesy: IDSA, India.

Words Hurt CMR

SvipjaCMR Chair has no comments on this incident except that we can not achieve 'heights' with 20th Century (pre-independence) mind sets in the 21st Century where we need to 'aggregate and integrate' national and international talent to achieve excellence.

Civil-Military Relations should integrate at the strategic level and flow downwards upto district level. We as a nation are on the 'learning curve' of democracy. Let the System emerge naturally in the Indian Environments. No one needs to be 'emotional'. If there have been failures in our conduct we should accept them gracefully. Only then will we improve.

We can however apply corrections 'intelligently with grace intact' as we proceed.

Devise foolproof mechanism for professional assessments.

SvipjaCMRChair

Civil-Military Relations Under Scan

We need an Indian Model for Civil-Military Relations. This is necessitated for reasons of our being a comparatively ‘young nation’, emerging quality of political leadership and its ethos, self-serving attitudes all around, rampant corruption, under-development of about 40% of our population, and tensed security scenario in the sub-continent amongst others.

In order that the Indian Democracy develops and flourishes, all stakeholders in the country need to ensure effective and efficient Governance. Political Leadership should vow and act to provide it. Indian Masses cannot wait indefinitely, or else the vacuum in leadership will be filled by certain other type of leadership, Communists, Maoists, or worse by Indian Military to its peril.

Our debate on Civil-Military Relations should focus on ‘concept’ rather than ‘actors’ – needs to be orchestrated at higher intellectual level. It is the transition of leadership from Civil to Military in nations that should be of concern to its citizens who believe in democratic values.

Svipja CMR Chair, http://www.svipjacmrchair.blogspot.com/ , addresses the issue of the Civil-Military Relations in the Indian Context dispassionately. We feel that we need to understand the nuances of the CMR as a nation, and apply them appropriately in our day-to-day interactions in Civil & Military spheres to retain the right balance. The Indian Constitution is then held high.

Shri NS Sisodia (ex-IAS) , Director General, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses(IDSA), could not be more right in articulating ,“This will involve providing greater space to the Armed Forces in relevant decision-making structures, seeking their partnership in national security and defence policy-making and addressing issues of modernisation and ‘jointness’ on priority.” And he aptly remarks: “A democratic polity is not just about civilian control but also about a military strong enough to protect it.”

Civil-Military-Civil Maryada should be the guiding light for the CMR.

After all, the Military pays the price of follies of the other ‘actors’ by its ‘blood’; stature and elan are dear to them.

Read the Article by Ali Ahmed , IDSA, Civil-Military Relations Under Scan

Brigadier(Retired) Sukhwindar Singh
Chairperson, SvipjaCMRChair

Why Deliberately Hurt CMR ?

CMR take years to build. Mutual respect between Civil-Military in CMR is an essential ingredient. No one should feel 'uppish'. Indian Constitution sets the 'Civil-Military Marayada' in perspective, silently though. And 'routine practices' strengthen it. Anyone crossing the 'limit' is damaging the Indian Democracy, which has found roots in our country and the CMR as such. Indian Military remains a valuable stakeholder in the Indian Democracy. The Military has 'internalised' democratic values over the years. It stands by it which is amply visible. No one should nourish any doubts.

Indian Judiciary has sensed areas of conflict in 'turf war' between civil-military, and harm it inflicts to the System. It is 'active' to say the least, and makes a 'positive contribution' to the CMR.

It is time that we 'educate' our System widely on nuances of the CMR - responsibility as a citizen of the Democratic India. Civil can always remain in control' without 'downgrading or admonishing publically' it's Military. In all this, India suffers.

Some of the slippages are well documented in a recent Article by General Vijay Oberoi(Retired), Former VCOAS. Pse Click to read Why Deliberately Hurt CMR?


Svipja CMR Chair

Why Autonomy Demand for Indian Military?

Our Military may feel bruised for it's inapt handling by politicians-bureaucratic combine in certain situations. Lately, our retired fraternity speaks up often on Civil-Military Relations sometimes with vengeance, ‘venom’ it may have gathered while in service.

The Article by Ashok Mehta advocates autonomy for the Indian Military. It is surprising! The General needs to suggest building strong CMR for India within the Indian Constitution, and the democratic form of Govt that the Indian Military supports. This is how nations prosper, and democracy and it's stakeholders mature.

May be a second attempt by him on the issue be more pragmatic!

Read the full Article: Autonomy Demand for Indian Military

Suggests the ‘low’ we have reached in the CMR, and some 'voicing' their opinions to the detriment of the System.

Svipja CMR Chair

Special Powers for Armed Forces - We Need Clarity, Not Emotions

The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, better known as AFSPA, has been brought out of wraps at various opportune times – opportune for those who have either something to gain, i.e. the insurgents in Jammu and Kashmir, political parties always ready to fish in troubled waters, with an eye on electoral gains or those who are regular establishment-baiters, who have made it a habit to take the plunge headlong in any controversy with the belief that if it is against an organ of the government, it needed to be opposed!

The insurgents we are fighting today are heavily armed, they act speedily, commit heinous crimes and disappear. Unless the army counters such actions with speed and not wait for orders from higher civil or military authorities, nothing would be achieved.

Also, the soldiers and officers of the army need to be protected from prosecution for consequential action taken against insurgents in good faith as part of their operations. Here too, the Act does contain the important caveat that the army personnel can be prosecuted with the Centre’s sanction, if their actions warrant it. There is, therefore, no blanket immunity from the laws of the land.

The army is designed and structured for fighting external enemies of the nation. Consequently, they are not given any police powers. However, when the nation wants the army to conduct counter-insurgency and counter-terrorist operations, then they must be given the legal authority to conduct their operations without the impediment of getting clearances from the higher authorities.

It is only then that the operations will be conducted in the usual efficient manner of the army and would be result-oriented. They also must be legally protected. It is because these two aspects have been catered for that the army has been neutralising the insurgents and terrorists, so that normalcy is restored and the political leaders and officials can restart governing.

Pse Click to Read the Complete Article: Special Powers for Armed Forces - We Need Clarity, Not Emotions


Svipja Technologies
(The Writer is Former Vice Chief of the Indian Army)

CMR in the US and Learning from It

The dismissal last week by US President Barak Obama of his military commander in Afghanistan, Lt Gen Stanley McChrystal, should be carefully studied. In contrast to India, where civil-military relations remain mired in wary mutual watchfulness, America has demonstrated a robust civil-military structure with a healthy tolerance for risk. This was evident from the joint political-military decision to prosecute an “Afghan friendly” strategy despite the politically nettlesome issue of higher US casualties; and from Obama’s swift decision that the general had unacceptably violated propriety in making public the fissures between top US policymakers.

It may be unthinkable in India, where the system produces generals (and that includes flag officers of the navy and the air force) who would never dream of functioning like Stanley McChrystal. Looking deeper especially at McChrystal’s, and now Petraeus’ selection as commanders in Afghanistan based on clear strategies that they brought to the table, India could learn much from the US civil-military structure, based as it is on meritocracy, responsibility and accountability.

Consider how India would have selected a commander for a hypothetical Afghanistan mission. The MoD would have asked the Indian Army to “post” a suitable general.

In the US the President nominates key commanders, based on their achievements and abilities, and the Congress ratifies those appointments. General Petraeus, for example, was nominated as US Central Command chief, superseding several compatriots, after framing a widely acclaimed counter-insurgency doctrine for the US military. American generals routinely leapfrog less talented officers while being appointed to higher rank.

In the poisoned relationship between India’s military and the bureaucratic-political elite, the Armed Forces do not accept US-style “deep selection”. India’s military suspects that political interests would run rampant, promoting well-connected officers rather than competent ones. The army remembers Lieutenant General BM Kaul, whose connections with Nehru allowed him to drive India to defeat at the hands of China in 1962.

Read the Full Post: http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/06/mcchrystal-gazing.html

The process that the US went through in removing the General from the Af Command is fairly graceful in a democracy. There could be different perceptions at strategic level amongst professionals at Flag Level, the Govt. in order to have it's 'will' prevail should always handle the issue gracefully and transparently taking the System, and the nation into confidence to avoid any negative fall-out - builds strong CMR.

Svipja Technologies

Afghan War General Removed from Command

President Barack Obama and Gen. David Petraeus walk to the White House Rose Garden on Wednesday to make a statement after meeting with Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who was ousted as commander of forces in Afghanistan. Patraeus was nominated to assume McChrystal's command.

Obama said bluntly that Gen. Stanley McChrystal's scornful remarks about admin officials represent conduct that "undermines the civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system." He ousted the commander after a face-to-face meeting in the Oval Office and named Petraeus, the Central Command chief, who was McChrystal's direct boss, to step in.

In a statement expressing praise for McChrystal yet certainty he had to go, Obama said he did not make the decision over any disagreement in policy or "out of any sense of personal insult." Flanked by Vice President Joe Biden, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in the Rose Garden, he said: "War is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a private, a general, or a president."

Afghan War General Removed from Command

This enhances CMR in a country -- a part of 'Military - Civil Maryada' covered in the Post below. Military must know where is the limit, and the Civil how to 'gracefully act' in an embarracing situation with the Military, upholding the national interests.


Svipja Technologies
Credit: msn.com

Britain’s Chief of Defence Staff Axed

Britain’s senior most serving military commander, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup has been axed before his term was to end in April next year. The Sun reports that the decision, which is expected to have far reaching political consequences, was announced by Defence Secretary Liam Fox.Sacking of Sir Stirrup has not surprised the security experts, as his performance in Afghanistan was seen as far from satisfactory and was dogged by the failure to provide the requisite equipment to the British troops in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, Chinese news agency Xinhua reports the British Defence Secretary denying charges that Sir Stirrup had been sacked. According to the news report, Liam has said that the services' professional head, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, had not been sacked, but he would be replaced early, leaving his post in the autumn some months earlier than his retirement in the spring of next year.

Current Army head General Sir David Richards or vice-Chief of the Defence Staff, General Sir Nicholas Houghton are favourites for the top job. The Ministry of Defence's top civil servant Sir Bill Jeffrey will also get the elbow. The Mirror reports that the Chief has been made a scapegoat and criticized the new government of politicizing the armed forces.

Coutesy: 8ak.

‘Indian Military Maryada’

Military is to support the Govt. Needless to mention that tasking of Military is articulated by the Govt. time-to-time through its Governing System to achieve various objectives that may be crucial for security of the nation. In democracies, the 'System of Governance' and the 'Chain to be Followed' are well-established. No one is expected to violate it.

It also needs no stressing that national defence is a complex phenomenon in which Military does play a role, vital though. The Military is expected to have requisite expertise in the domain. Other stakeholders will recognize the expertise if it contributes ‘positively’ to national aims and objectives; no one can ever ignore the ‘sane’ advice. It is here that ‘key’ to Civil-Military Relations lies. ‘I can’t force my opinion, others must find it useful in the overall context’, this should be the guiding thought. 'You be so amazing that You are needed for advice'.

Military must recognize that it is a part of the System. It can’t pursue or postulate anything else but the systemic line. Civil-Military aberrations that erupt in routine interactions, either way, can’t be allowed to derail the established System. Nor any statements which are not in sync with the official position of the Govt. be permitted - Opposition does it on occasions - otherwise the System will ‘deliver marginally’ to the extent of becoming ‘insane’.

As in personal life, CMR are a two-way traffic. This needs to be appreciated by all the stakeholders. Each must play its part truthfully, and with the desired maturity.

'Indian Military Maryada' can then manifest into 'Civil-Military Maryada', 'Military-Civil Maryada', 'Military-Military Maryada', 'Civil-Military-Veteran Maryada', and even 'Civil-Civil Maryada' for the System to resonate effectively all the time - be a Role Model - build the Indian Military Brand, do not diminish it.

Svipja CMR Chair

Your Military Too Goes Through This

Is Military a different breed?

Courtesy: Brigadier(Retired) Mastinder Singh, Sena Medal, and his Network.

Svipja CMR Chair: A Dynamic Model Needs to be Developed for CMR

[A lot has happened in the CMR arena in the Indian Context in the recent past. It was therefore considered prudent to establish 'Svipja Civil-Military Relations Chair' from within resources of Svipja Technologies, a Think Tank in its own right. Our research will be objective, impartial and a positive delivery to Democratic forms of Govts, with special focus on India. This Note in fact marks genesis of the Chair.]

Indian Military has remained loyal and apolitical since Independence. It appears to have faced ‘not-so-pleasant’ handling in our system, reasons are many. Has resulted in ‘grouses’, at the levels of officers and men which are amply seen lately. As a ‘maturing democracy’, we all need to be careful. We can not afford to let the professionalism of the Indian Military erode in view of challenges & commitments that the nation has.

It is time that we develop a ‘dynamic model’ for better understanding of the type of civil-military relations which could dominate the country’s political life. The creation of a multi-factorial model is therefore needed. This model ought to be a composite one. The following issues could be considered:

Firstly, The military institution itself. A close observation to the size of the military institution, the social background and the level of professionalism of its members, their political ideology, their level of cohesion and unity as well as that of their desire to protect their corporate interest(s), could offer us a better chance for comprehending the relations.

Secondly, the model should take into consideration the effect of the domestic social, economic and the political environment in which the military institution lives and functions. Special attention ought to be paid to the political factors since it is this which will greatly determine whether the process of democratisation has established strong roots in the nations’ military and the country.

Thirdly, the role of the international factor and more specifically the influence which the major foreign powers could exercise upon both the military establishments, and the country’s para-military forces in their routine interactions.

Lastly, the past and the present role of the military institutions in the evolution of civil-military relations. A small rider below should be added here.

Most studies of civil-military relations are greatly concerned with the 'military factor' only after an intervention occurs. The role of these institutions in domestic policy-making process in situations where the military does not rule, is often neglected or under-estimated. Although most of research anywhere focuses on the immediate factors leading to the military intervention, they forget that the military organization as "a system of continuous purposive activity of specified kind" functions within the society long before the pre-intervention stage. It is said that "the direct control of govt. by officers or military junta is only a crude indication of the role that the armed forces may be playing at a given moment, for men in uniform have sundry ways of making their will felt".

The phenomenon needs a continuous study. May be institutions like IDSA /Other Think Tanks could help in regular profiling of Civil-Military Relations in India. The relations are ‘not very diligently’ handled presently, to say the least.


Brigadier (Retired) Sukhwindar Singh
http://www.svipja.com/
Credit: NATO Study on Turkey & Greece.

Svipja CMR Chair (3): Why are CMR More Important in a Democracy?

(This Posting was First Mede by Me on www.InformedCitizensForum.com on 26 Mar 2010)

There is a ‘rooted’ tendency amongst Us to narrow Civil-Military Relations to IAS-Military Top Brass. In wider sense it in fact relates to who governs the Country, Civil or Military leadership?

Civil is all encompassing - politicians, civil bureaucracy including allied civil services, police, State machinery, civil offices providing services like supplies, power, water, teles, transportation, roads, etc. Military and its personnel deal at various levels of ‘civil governance’ in official and personal capacities. Any aberrations to military personnel while on duty, off duty, or at home leaves them frustrated. Military has expectations to be governed / handled diligently and in an orderly fashion. It is here that a soldier ‘grumbles’ when he is ‘towed’ to follow ethos alien to him.

First damage to civil-military relation stems when a soldier is handled shabbily, dishonestly, or indifferently in the Civil. And this could multiply manifold as he moves through his ‘life cycle’. In his frustration, he then uses ‘force’, the only ‘expertise’ developed in him to reach his objective, at least temporarily, willing to face its consequences subsequently.

Any nation has to be sensitive not to bruise soldiers’ pride in day-to-day interactions. Self-Pride, Self-Respect, Self-Reliance, High-Class Motivation, Professionalism, Ability to Lead by Example, etc are his inherent strengths. Any act that tends to lower it is damaging to the Forces, and Nation as a whole. Anyone including Armed Forces Leadership hurting/undermining these basic traits in any manner is doing disservice to the Nation as it may result in ‘mass grouse’, sometimes difficult to be handled by leadership. That’s why the Armed Forces handle cases of bad management, indiscipline or corruption strictly.

‘All Civil Institutions’ need to fully appreciate it in a democracy like India, where ‘ethos & personal examples’ tend to become casualty.

A Soldier is a Class by Itself and Should be treated as Such. He is then ‘fit’ to deliver optimally ensuring Your Freedom.

We are an established democracy now, it is time that we talked and discussed Civil-Military Relations openly, and organised ourselves on 'Systems Approach' both in thinking and action.

Sukhwindar
Svipja Technologies
[It is a stub, could be expanded to a full Article by some Researcher(s)]

Svipja CMR Chair(2): A Perspective

(This Posting was First Made by Me on www.shatrujeet.blogspot.com on 05 Apr 2010)

Some excerpts from the Article of Lt General Vijay Oberoi, PVSM, AVSM, VSM, Former VCOAS, are given below which have CMR Implications in the Indian Context:

“The deteriorating civil-military relations do not bode well for the safety and security of the nation. And the regional security environment is cause for concern. The status of army personnel is dwindling continuously, adversely affecting the morale of the rank and file.”

“In democracies the world over, the political leadership makes national policy and the national security strategy, with the active participation of civil and military officials of the country. However, in India, the military has been deliberately kept out of the policy formulation loop and even after over six decades of loyal, patriotic and dedicated service to the nation, it is obvious that it is still not trusted!”

“The military also needs to modify the concept of being apolitical. The army’s long standing stance of keeping a distance from the leaders of political parties other than those of the party in power needs to be modified. In a parliamentary system like ours, policy is formulated by all parliamentarians despite differences of the opposition. After all, the Parliament Standing Committee on Defence and similar other committees are all-party bodies. Consequently, though remaining apolitical, the army needs to apprise and discuss its concerns with the political leadership across the board. This would not reduce the apolitical nature of the army, about which it is justifiably so proud.”

“Civil Control implies the supremacy of the political leadership over both the military as well as the civil bureaucracy.”

Click: Challenges Before the New Army Chief for the full Article.

Svipja CMR Chair

Svipja CMR Chair (1): India's Think Tanks

(This Posting was First Made by Me on www.InformedCitizensForum.com on 03 Apr 2010)

Firstly, Think Tanks should in the normal course aim to influence targeted audience for getting their ‘mind share’. It should take a ‘systems approach’ to an issue with the ultimate objective of sound implementation to achieve the desired outcome. It is not correct to say that the Policy Makers or Others may not ‘heed to the advice, or may not be influenced’ by the Think Tanks. It does in a way. If not, these are not Think Tanks then - their research results may be ‘tainted’, not in line with the democratic values, or totally out of context. Think Tanks need not work in ‘vacuum’ of any kind and should relate to the existing or future course(s). That much for the concept.

Secondly, Think Tanks need to be staffed with practicing managers/researchers and academia of the right kind to tackle real-life situations, and not be pure ‘philosophic’. These should relate to our ‘own’ environments. This would help in looking at their findings from ‘Policy Angle(s)’. Who funds it may not be very important in today’s intellectual scenario; system sees it through and places credibility on the Think Tanks accordingly. There may be hundreds of them but a few are creditworthy.

Thirdly, the subject matter to be tackled could take the form of a 'Chair’, for long life. The Chair could be established in Corporates, Universities, Foundations, etc, provided they operate under the Charter of Think Tanks. Intellect is widely dispersed.

Mr Kanti Bajpai’s Article in today’s TOI on ‘ Think Tanks in India’s Democracy’ puts the subject issue in a perspective, but the 'common notion'.

Click: Think Tanks in Democracy

'Svipja Civil-Military Relations (CMR) Chair' be seen in this context, a faithful delivery to the Indian Democracy and its People in CMR.

Svipja Technologies

Launch of ‘Svipja Civil- Military Relations Chair’

(Svipja CMR Chair was launched on 29 Mar 2010)

General

“Svipja Civil- Military Relations Chair” (or ‘Chair’, for short) has been set-up by Svipja Technologies with a view to harness Ideas from Intellectual Defence Community to promote Civil-Military Relations in India. Views from the International Community will also be welcome.

This work is needed in order to raise intellectual capital of the stakeholders in line with the values enshrined in the Indian Constitution. It would help reinforcing democratic values in the Defence Community with Military Ethos intact.

Objectives

The establishment of the Chair and Fellowships is expected to:

1. Promote healthy and meaningful exchange of ideas amongst the intellectual Defence Community on civil-military relations in the Indian Context.

2. Facilitate wider, deeper, and un-biased discussions / interactions amongst the intellectual Community, and Faculty / Moderator(s) appointed against the Chair or as Fellows, in particular.

Terms and Conditions

The creation and operation of the Chair and Fellowships will be subject to the terms enumerated in the succeeding paras.

Methodology Research work on the subject will be undertaken by a Team constituted by Svipja Technologies within the Objectives laid. Certain identified Blogs / Sites will be used to initiate discussions amongst the stakeholders. Once done, ‘finished product’ would be circulated to the stakeholders, and published in a transparent manner.

Donor(s) Svipja Technologies will meet all the expenses of the Chair as a Founder.

Founder Chairperson Brigadier (Retired) Sukhwindar Singh will be the first Chairperson.

Guidelines for “Appointment” of Faculty Against the Chair To be approved by the Board of Governors established by Svipja Technologies / Trusts / Donors.

Eligibility Anyone with a track record in defence with independent, impartial & sound logical abilities would be eligible to be considered for “appointment” against the Chair. Individual(s) being considered would first be appointed as Moderator(s). The Chair has a Think Tank’s charter.

Duration of the Chair The “appointment” against the Chair will be made for a period of up to five years. However, continuation into the fourth and fifth years will be subject to a review at the end of the third year. Further, an individual may be eligible to be considered for re-appointment, together with other eligible candidates, for a period of up to 5 years (without a break) any number of times.

Designation Member(s) appointed against the Chair will be called “Svipja Civil-Military Relations Chair Emeritus Research Fellow / Research Fellow / Research Associate Fellow”.

Research Grant To be assigned by Svipja Technologies on need basis as the faculty / work expands.

Intellectual Property (IP) Rights As a result of the “appointment” against the Chair, there shall be no change in the rights applicable to the IP developed by the researchers / faculty members and/or his/her collaborators.

Strategic Alliance(s) Svipja Technologies would be willing to establish strategic alliance(s) with like-minded bodies.

Research Presentations Research Articles will be published on Media/Sites/Blogs identified for the purpose. In addition, as a result of the “appointment” against the Chair, the faculty would be expected to undertake Presentations of the research findings of the Chair to various targeted audience, organizations and institutions.

Conclusion

This work would enhance intellectual capital of the stakeholders for security of the country in environments unfolding in the 21st Century India. Dynamics of the Civil-Military relations needs to be captured routinely in the Indian Polity.

You are welcome to contribute Your thoughts on the CMR in the Indian Context as Comments on this Blog, or by e-mail to svipja@gmail.com Your Privacy will be fully maintainted if You so like.

Sukhwindar

www.svipja.com