Politico-Military Interface in India in CMR Context

Military is a stand-by Administration for Governance when Civil Administration fails, or is not able to govern for various reasons. Military always thinks that it is the Political Masters that should 'call the shots', not others. 

A very high degree of understanding and working relationship is needed between politico-bureaucratic combine on one hand, and the Military on the other from Top Down up to District /Tehsil Levels. It is ‘greased’ and strengthened by regular and cordial interactions thru meetings in various ways and forums. 

We have a National Army now, not the one politician encountered pre-independence. The Defence Forces have internalized ‘democracy’ in its training and organizations. More trust in the 'Armed Wings' of the Union would benefit the Nation. General Ved Malik's Article is apt on certain issues.

Politico-Military Interface in India in CMR Context

Ethics, Ethos and the New Chief

Chairman SvipjaCMRChair had written on this Blog on 16 Jan 2012 that the COAS of the Indian Army should have tendered his resignation once his age plea was not accepted by the Govt., and definitely after the Court verdit. It did not happen, but followed many 'ungraceful' events.

Lt General S.K. Sinha, formerly Vice-Chief of Army Staff, and ex-Governor of Assam, and Jammu and Kashmir, a very savvy General and an Indian to the core, while writing 'Ethics, Ethos and the New Chief' on 31 May 2012 has observed the following:

1. The last one year has been a dark patch in the history of the Indian Army. Gen. V.K. Singh’s tenure as Chief started with a blaze of a self-created controversy compounded by the shenanigans of a few others.

2. Never before has any Chief in this country or any democracy in the world, filed a statutory complaint or gone to court. This lowered the dignity of that high office. Matters were compounded by the caste factor being brought in.

3. Members of Parliament of his caste sought the Prime Minister’s intervention in his favour and his brother-in-law organised a public rally in his support in Delhi. Instead of distancing himself from all this, he as a serving Chief went to unveil the statue of a former Prime Minister belonging to his caste.

4. Civil stands for the political executive and not for civil servants. Subordination of the military to the civil should not mean subservience or servility. There may be occasions when a Chief may have serious differences with the government on policy matters of national importance. In that event, he must resign and not promote public controversy while still in service.

5. Napoleon’s advice about military operations is relevant: “Every General-in-Chief when given orders that he feels are wrong must represent and get them changed. If this is not done, then he must resign.”

The Article provides 'a very grand view' of how CMR should move in the Indian Context. Provides insight into the complex CMR in democracies.

Read the Full Article: Ethics, Ethos and the New Chief

Change of the Indian Army Chief on Retirement

General Bikram Singh takes over as the Indian Army Chief today on General VK Singh demitting the Office.

General VK Singh 'rocked the boat', as some say- brought IA into public debate. 'Everyone said Everything' for and against the Defence Forces. Some ugly attempts erupted to tarnish 'images'. It is all over, hopefully.

I for one always hold the Chief's office in high esteem, and 'an institution in itself'. No one including the Chief himself is entitled to bring it to public controversy whatever be the reasons. It has 'blood' of many brave hearts etched on its walls. Personal interests over-weighed. 'Personality of an Honorable Military Leader' seems to diminish & crumble under personal agenda! Civil-Military Relations seem to come under stress, unnecessarily, though very strong intrinsically. Everyone had a field day in propounding various theories.

New Chief has to steer through all this.

All the Best, Chief!

Chairman, SvipjaCMRChair

Army Chief-MOD Row over Certain Personal & Professional Issues

The uneasy calm in COAS-Govt working recently has become a matter of debate in national media. Unfortunate as it may seem, departure from old working ethos, it is required to be seen in correct perspective in our system of governance, democracy.

We feel it is not a case of adverse Civil-Military Relations but an inappropriate handling of matters relating to personal issues of the Army Chief, and certain defence equipment procurement problems and corruption there-in.

Age row is a personal matter and affects succession in the Army. If one gains, the other(s) lose. Govt. of the day has taken a pragmatic decision on it.

As regards procurement issues, it is an ongoing and a complex matter and has nothing to do with 'sour' Civil-Military Relations. Yes, we all must endeavor to keep our Armed Forces modern in keeping with our tasks and move efficiently. Communication to the PM is very much in order; MOD just needs to be kept in loop.

Chairman, SvipjaCMRChair

Indian Army Chief Withdraws his Petition on Age Issue

After 'broad' hearing in the SC on 10 Feb 2012, the Court gave Gen VK Singh the option of withdrawing his petition. The Chief did so.

CMR Imperative of the COASs Episode

As a 'maturing democracy', provide an honorable exit to the Indian Army Chief. It is in the strategic interests of the nation.

Errors get compounded in any process unless ‘wisely’ filtered. The process of handling the ‘age row’ had been faulty all along from both the sides. Must shun it w/o arguments in the Court, helps no one.

Chairman SvipjaCMRChair

Indian Army Chief Goes to the Supreme Court Over His Age Row

SvipjaCMRChair has been closely following the case. As per media reports, it now emerges that the Chief has taken recourse to the Court Order in the matter. Our candid observations/Comments are:

1. It is not a CMR Issue as made out by some in the media. It affects the succession chain within the Army. It is therefore a matter relevant to the Army hierarchy. The Govt. has to only ensure that orders/instrs on the subject in vogue are 'rightly' enforced.

2. The Chief of any Army is an institution in itself. He upholds the dignity of the 'August Office'. He is duty-bound not to let the Office slip into any controversy for it to become a subject matter of public debate. There is no limit to varied thoughts then.

3. It is important that any such matters involving officers beyond the Commanding Officers' level are handled with due sensitivity and care by the hierarchy, military and civil both, as these level of officers are very senior. Any aberrations in such cases affect the morale and discipline of the Forces.

4. Having reached the impasse, the COAS is left with no option but to 'honourably resign'. As a soldier and an officer he has delivered to the Nation to the best of his ability. He needs an 'honourable exit' in all circumstances. May be he was advised incorrectly w/o any considerations to ethos, customs and traditions of the Armed Forces.

All this impacts the Armed Forces the world over, a lesson for all Govts.

Chairman SvipjaCMR Chair