Site Title

Tag: military

  • Indira Gandhi: “Gungi Gudiya” or “Durga”?

    In his prolific book, Why I Supported the Emergency, India’s best-known writer Khushwant Singh, recalls what Hilaire Belloc mentions about Indira Gandhi: “Her face was like the King’s command, when all the swords are drawn”. In the realm of Indian history, there have been very few leaders who could match the majestic demeanor of Mrs. Gandhi. The decisions that she took during her rule changed the Indian polity forever and its repercussions continue to echo till this day in our contemporary times.

    India, as we know it today, is largely the result of Mrs. Gandhi’s tenure as the country’s prime minister. People representing different political parties have differing views about her. Some like the statesman Atal Bihari Vajpayee called her “Durga” and some like Ram Manohar Lohiya called her “Gungi Gudiya”. While she might be docile in the initial stages of her political career, she went on to become one of the strongest leaders who rewrote the chapters of the Indian political landscape. On the one side, she knew how to aptly deal with her opponents, and on many occasions, with an iron hand, but on the other hand, she connected with the ordinary people of the nation who called her “Amma” or mother.

    Like her father Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira had several political feats that transmogrified Indian political history, but like him, she also had her share of blunders that continue to reverberate to this day. From the “assassination” of Lal Bahadur Shastri in Tashkent to the assault on CPI leader Sitaram Yechury on the JNU campus, her political life was marred with controversies and political dissensions. As the first woman prime minister of independent India, she rose to such a status in her long career that for millions of Indians, “India was Indira and Indira was India”.

    In my view, the greatest achievement of Mrs. Gandhi was the liberation of Bangladesh in 1971. Pakistan had to be “taught a lesson” for its atrocities in the then East Pakistan and it was under the leadership of Indira that it was meticulously implemented. Just before the invasion, she asked Sam Manekshaw, the former chief of the Indian Army to enter erstwhile East Pakistan, but Manekshaw replied back that he needed to prepare for a complete definite victory. And victory did come when after a few months, the Indian armed forces entered Bangladesh.

    I recall one of the interviews of Mrs. Gandhi conducted by BBC on this matter in which she was questioned about the morality of interfering in another country’s matter. Her response was “What did Allied forces do when Hitler went rampant all over Europe?”. Post World War – II never has a country been liberated by the sheer use of military might except Bangladesh. This conflict under her prime ministership catapulted India to a regional power to reckon with. She was posthumously awarded the “Bangladesh Freedom Honor” for her role in the freedom of that country.

    The 1971 war was not a standalone military accomplishment under the “authority” of Mrs. Gandhi. In my opinion, there are two more historical episodes in which India and its armed forces emerged triumphant. The first was the 1967 Indo-Chinese skirmishes that took place in the state of Sikkim. The Indian forces caused massive casualties on the Chinese side and regained their lost pride from the India-China conflict of 1962. The other was the equally significant “Operation Meghdoot“. Indian forces, under the leadership of Indira Gandhi, captured the strategically crucial Siachen Glacier and made it part of the Jammu and Kashmir region.

    Another of the great achievements of Mrs. Gandhi was the detonation of nuclear bombs in 1971. Codenamed “Smiling Buddha“, the tests, although done for the peaceful use of nuclear energy, gave India the status of a “Nuclear power”. She knew the needs of a growing country as large as India and had the nerve to make the bold decision to conduct the tests despite the fear of sanctions imposed by the United States and other Western countries. I think “Smiling Buddha” paved the way for the Indian Government to carry on the much-required second round of nuclear explosions under “Operation Shakti” in 1998.

    Despite these aforementioned magnificent accomplishments, Mrs. Gandhi had her share of debacles. The biggest one was that of the storming of Golden Temple in 1984 under Operation Bluestar. This was one such mishap for which India had to pay dearly. In my view, no other historical event was as ghastly as this operation. While I do agree that it was imperative to flush out the terrorists from the holy shrine and maintain the sanctity of the temple, I would disagree with the way it was carried out. More than that, I would challenge the “real intent” of this unfortunate operation.

    Several open and unanswered questions strike me as I ponder on the intricacies of Operation Blue Star. Why was the attack carried out on the Sikh religious day commemorating the martyrdom of the fifth Guru Arjan Dev Ji? Didn’t the “Indira administration” know that there would be thousands of pilgrims inside the complex? Who is responsible and accountable for the innocent lives lost? Were there any negotiations carried out with the terrorists and if so, what was the scope and level of those negotiations? Could a different strategy similar to the one carried out during Operation Black Thunder be used to get rid of the terror elements residing inside the temple? Could a complete blockade of food, water, and electricity work? These questions will continue to haunt our “secular” country till justice is served.

    A few days back, I got to know about the Soviet launched “Operation Kontakt”. This operation aimed to provide concocted and falsified documents to the then Indian government run by Mrs. Gandhi about the support of Pakistan and the CIA given to the separatists. Although I am convinced that Pakistan supplied weapons and funds to the Khalistan movement, the intent of the above mentioned Soviet operation was to malign the Pakistani administration and the CIA and to exaggerate and amplify the urgency of carrying out the operation “impetuously”. Blue Star was executed without proper thought and to hurt the very “Psych” of the entire Sikh community. One of the consequences of this assault was that the moderate and educated Sikhs who were critic of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale also turned against Indira Gandhi and the state of India. It took several years for the Sikh community to get back into the fold and integrate once again into the Indian society.

    I will now touch upon another contentious event that was undertaken under the “brinkmanship” of Mrs. Gandhi. Emergency was imposed by Indira from 1975 to 1977 and it went on for 21 months. I strongly believe that a country as complicated as India needs an “iron grip” to govern its massive, “uncontrolled” and “untamed” population. The emergency period brought with it some of the very instrumental and positive changes in our society. Busses and trains ran on time, work became ethical and people reported on time. Slums were eradicated and cities were beautified. There was a sense of discipline all over the country. However, there were some nefarious aspects attached to that period as well. A censorship was imposed on the press and it was instructed to toe the line or face the consequences. Press is one of the pillars of a democratic society and for any nation to become a champion of secularism and liberal values, freedom of its media houses is vital.

    During the emergency, thousands of opponent leaders were put behind the jails and their voices subdued. Men, including those of old age, were dragged from the buses and sterilized forcefully. In my opinion, there is a fine line that separates governing a country by the rule of law and curbing the freedom of speech of people. Whether the Emergency was good or bad remains a matter of debate but one thing is certain. It remains one of the most controversial eras of Indian history spearheaded by Mrs. Gandhi.

    One can recall Indira Gandhi as a tyrant, a decisive leader, and even an incarnation of “Durga”, but unquestionably not a “Gungi Gudiya”.

  • Why I support the “Agniveer” scheme?

    I staunchly believe that when a person joins the armed forces, it is not only him who lives in the army, it is the army that lives within him. It flows through the veins and the blood of the person for the rest of his life. In one of my recent articles, I championed the idea that Army service should be made mandatory in India. The ongoing India-Pakistan conflict has brought the contentious “Agniveer” scheme to the forefront again. Many, especially in the opposition parties, believe that this scheme should be abolished. While I do respect their point of view, I wholeheartedly champion the Agniveer scheme and clearly envisage its immense benefits to both individual growth and national progress.

    The foremost rational against the Agniveer is that it will create unemployment among the youth since the scheme is only valid for four years and does not provides long term job security. I would argue that on the contrary to the aforementioned point, the Agniveer scheme will open new doors of employment for the “Agniveers”. Having credentials of serving in the armed forces is one of the strongest credentials one can have on their resume. We have seen that many officers in the armed forces take a hiatus from their service and pursue higher education. For those completing their full service and retiring form the forces join as guides and mentors in various corporations and educational institutes. Likewise, the Agniveers can also capitalize on their tenure in the armed forces to find suitable employment elsewhere after graduating from the scheme.

    To build up on my argument, I would like to state that under the Agniveer Scheme, Government has made provisions to train these young minds in various vocational streams like electricians, barbers, washermen, etc. This training will undoubtedly assist the Agniveers to navigate their career paths post their service in the armed forces. The scheme provides a platform for the already unemployed youths to give four “fruitful” years to the military service and then build on that experience in their later lives. The scheme also provides a podium for the disoriented and dejected youth of the country to find a purpose in their lives. The training they get in the forces can add a definitive meaning to their professional lives and provide a direction to them. Many state governments like that of Haryana, and Assam have already stepped in and announced 10% reservations in their police force for the graduates of the scheme.

    Critics of the scheme also assert that it does not provides pension and long term monetary benefits. I ,on the contrary, argue that the priceless experience they gain from their service in the armed forces will eventually help them financially in the long term. The people joining the Agniveer program are between the age group of 17 – 23. How many young minds of the country get an opportunity to start their careers and earn at this early stage of their lives? The categorical answer is not many. The government has already committed a lump sum amount of around 12 Lakh Indian rupees to the people retiring from the Agniveer scheme. In my view, it is a decent amount of money one can earn especially in their nascent years.

    Efforts are already underway to ensure that “Quality” of the service provided by these Agniveers is maintained and is at par with the services provided by regular armed forces personal. This is being done by providing the same level and standards of training to the aspirants of the scheme as one receives if he joins the army through the regular mode of entry. While I do agree that fiscal astuteness does plays a role in formulating schemes and policies like the Agniveer, but I firmly believe in what Lieutenant General KJS Dhillon said that, unlike other professions, the balance sheet of an armed forces personal is measured in life and death. Serving in the Army is one of the most noble occupations in any country. More than any budgeting or financial planning, it is the unamputated spirit of a solider that matters. Agniveer creates that spirit in the aspiring youth of the country.

    Besides the aforesaid benefits at an individual level, I think that the scheme will have immense societal advantages too. It will nurture civic sense and a sense of belonginess among the Agniveers. They will become responsible citizens of the country and will boost their patriotism. The youth graduating from the program can act as a second line of defense in wake of any internal or external crises that country might face. Agniveer scheme is one of the most constructive schemes orchestrated by the central government towards nation building.

    I would have serious reservations about the Agniveer scheme had it compromised on the recruitment of Indian army officers through the National Defense Academy (NDA) or the Officers Training Academy (OTA). The primary focus of this scheme is bridging the shortfall of soldiers in the armed forces, giving unemployed youth an opportunity to build their careers while serving the nation and consequently pruning the national defense budge.

    Every governmental policy or a scheme undergoes iterations and evolves in time. Agniveer scheme is no exception. It will undergo evolutions with the passage of time. As the Chief of Army Staff, Upendra Dwivedi commented in one of his interviews that the scheme is still under observation and will be assessed once the first batch of “Agniveers” complete their tenure in 2026. I would align my thought with that and state that the Defense forces will reap the full advantages of this scheme over the time. I also strongly feel that it is an instrumental and a promising initiative to boost the capabilities of our Armed forces and should not be scrapped.

  • Should there be mandatory Military service in India?

    There is a famous adage by John F. Kennedy which says “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country”. In a world ravaged by wars and conflicts, patriotism, or the emotion of love for one’s country has never been been more cardinal. From Israel-Hamas conflict to Ukraine-Russia conflict to Armenia-Azerbaijan dispute and now the ongoing India-Pakistan standoff, we are finding ourselves engulfed in an increasingly hostile global environment.

    Contrary to what some thinkers and philosophers opine that a country is just an abstract concept and patriotism is an “idiotic” sentiment, I would argue that serving one’s country and upholding its ethos is absolutely a moral and conscientious duty of its citizens. Plato, the Greek Philosopher, in his seminal work Crito states that one should be ready to die for one’s country. A nation is a lot more than just a geographical area. It embodies within it a rich culture, its history, its traditions and its virtues. It gives a unifying identity to its inhabitants and binds them into a common strand.

    There are umpteen ways to serve one’s country and its interests. In my opinion, conscription or a mandatory military service for a limited period of time is one of the foremost ways to participate in nation building. This takes me back to the year 2003 when I had an opportunity to join the National Cadet Corps or NCC. Personally, it was one of the most enriching experiences of my life. The fourteen days that I spent with the valorous soldiers of the Indian Armed forces transmogrified not only my physique but my mental state of mind.

    NCC was formed in 1948 with direct involvement of Jawaharlal Nehru and headed by H.N Kunzru. Since its inception, it has played a constructive role in serving national interests. Serving time in Army or getting trained in an organization like NCC fuels the patriotic feeling and enhances a sense of belongingness among its citizens. It transforms people into valuable resources which can be used during any state of emergency, irrespective of whether it is internal or external. This service creates a large pool of “human capital” that can be channelized for societal development.

    A mandatory military service instills leadership qualities and provides mental and psychological strength. It increases civic sense among its people and creates a “caring attitude” towards the society and the country at large. To add to that, it generates immense pride and appreciation for the Armed forces who sacrifice their lives for the nation. Many countries like Singapore, Egypt and Israel already have conscription enacted by the laws of their respective countries.

    Given the geographical position of India and its discord with Pakistan and China, I strongly think that having mandatory service in armed forces is not only productive but creates a second line of defense. It is empowering not only at the individual level but also at the national level.