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
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
