tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-79719091621322569122024-03-08T14:49:28.472+05:30Straight from the ShoulderStraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971909162132256912.post-27612509456354374252016-07-20T22:25:00.002+05:302016-07-20T22:26:13.706+05:30<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">TURKEY’S
FAILED COUP : A WARNING SHOT</span></u></b></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;"></span></u></b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">AND
PRESIDENT ERDOGAN’S CHOICES : </span></u></b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">BY
BRIGADIER AJIT NAIR (RETD)<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The failed coup has
sent a clear message to the Turkish establishment and to Erdogan in particular.
That he must mend his autocratic ways, curb Police excesses and reign in the
gradual Islamisation of the Country. And that the Army is restive and it will
not tolerate any deviation from the Country’s basic Constitution. But Erdogan
is a feisty customer and it’s a moot point whether he will heed the warning.
Erdogan has ascribed the coup’s failure as a victory for the people and to his
control over the Army – the fact that only a small fraction of the Army
participated. That may well be true, but given Turkey’s turbulent history of
the last 60<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>years or so, that’s no
guarantee that the next coup will not succeed. Military coups do not need the
people’s support, although that helps; and all other Parties and their
supporters are bitterly opposed to Erdogan, the mutual stand and apparent
agreement in Parliament of Saturday notwithstanding. Erdogan has severely
restricted the powers of the Military by legislative action over the last few
years and controlled the Generals, but past events have shown that coups can
emanate at a relatively junior level.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">Turkey was created by a General, after a
violent uprising. And that explains the Army’s pre-eminent status ever since. </span><span lang="EN-IN">Mustafa Kemal Ataturk </span><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">proved
his mettle during the First World War and led his Country to Independence in
1922 and became its first President. His vision was of a Democratic and Secular
Nation and he de facto appointed the Army to be the custodian of these values.
The Army has taken this role very seriously indeed. Opting to stay out of
politics but watching over political actions and their effect on the people.
Whenever they felt that the mandate of the Founding Father was being violated,
they stepped in with<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>a military coup –
but quickly handed power back to the politicians. Erdogan was the first PM to
whittle away this pre-eminence, albeit only in his second term. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">The Army and the Courts who interpret the
Constitution, have resisted the slightest effort by politicians to even give an
Islamic flavour to the Country. A classic example is that most ubiquitous
though harmless symbol of Islam – the Head Scarf for women. Turkey has banned
the head scarf in Public life and women may not wear it in any public office,
in schools, hospitals or in the Courts. Any woman wearing a head scarf will not
be employed by the Govt or any Public or private institution. </span><span lang="EN-IN">France and Mexico too have banned the head scarf. But Turkey, though
a secular country, has over 95% Muslims. It has resulted in a clash between
those favouring the secular principles of the state, such as the Turkish Armed
Forces, who form a minority of the population, and religious conservatives as
well as Islamists, who form a majority of the population. And who form the majority
of Erdogan’s supporters. Erdogan tried his best to remove the ban. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span lang="EN-IN">When Erdogan wanted to install Abdullah Gul in 2007 as President,
the Army objected, because his wife wore the head scarf. Erdogan was confident
enough to hold a private meeting with the Chief of Staff, and to go ahead with
his nomination. But the Military Top Brass refused to attend any Ceremony
presided over by Abdullah Gul, because his wife wore a head scarf. On February
7, 2008, the Turkish Parliament passed an amendment to the constitution,
allowing women to wear the headscarf in Turkish universities, arguing that many
women would not seek an education if they could not wear the head scarf. A
reasonable argument. But Turkey's Constitutional Court annulled the Parliament's
amendment, ruling that removing the ban was against the founding principles of
the Constitution. Which may well be Erdogan’s angst against Judges. And clearly
shows the Army’s almost fanatical support for Secularism.</span><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">Previous Coups.</span></u></b><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Through Erdogan’s fog this much
seems clear: More than 35 years after the last coup, and almost two decades
after the 1997 military intervention, the fight between Secularism and Islamism
rages on. The first Coup – in 1960 was staged on grounds of socio-political and
economic problems – and for Bloc loyalties. The Govt was broke and wanted
Russian assistance and the Coup leaders wanted to remain in NATO/CENTO. The
second Coup in 1971 was on political instability and was action-less. The Army
issued a Memorandum, akin to an Ultimatum – reform or else....The Govt
resigned, but the Army, reluctant to take over overtly, directed from behind
the scene, with the Legislature still functioning. The third Coup in 1980 was mainly
because of economic problems and partly political. There was widespread arrests
and incarcerations, torture and missing people. The Constitution was
re-written. The last Coup was in 1997 – actually another Memorandum. This was
directed against the </span><span lang="EN-IN">Islamist prime minister Necmettin
Erbakan of the Welfare Party, of which Erdogan was a member and serving as the
Mayor of Istanbul. In 1998, the Welfare Party was banned by the Constitutional
court and Erdogan jailed and banned from politics for five years. These events
led him to deeply resent the Army and the Courts.</span><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">Why did this current Coup collapse so quickly?
Firstly, the Coup was extremely poorly organised. Even with tanks, attack
helicopters and fighter aircraft, it collapsed within six hours !! Without any major
opposition from organised security forces, either Army or Police. There was no
attempt to shut down the major civil TV stations, no attempt to arrest the
civilian leadership, including Erdogan. The Coup looks extremely contrived. They
tried too little and gave up too fast. While Erdogan accused Fethullah Gulen of
master-minding or actively assisting the Coup, Gulen promptly counter accused
Erdogan of staging a “fake” Coup. With a lot of plausibility. If a litmus test
of ‘who did the failed coup serve’ is applied – Erdogan seems the more likely
of the two. The New York Times says this about the Coup – “</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">As coups go, the Turkish effort was
a study in ineptitude: No serious attempt to capture or muzzle the existing
political leadership, no leader ready to step in, no communication strategy (or
even awareness of social media), no ability to mobilize a critical mass within
either the armed forces or society. In their place a platoon of hapless
soldiers on a bridge over the Bosporus in Istanbul and the apparently
uncoordinated targeting of a few government buildings in Ankara.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">The
Gulen factor</span></u></b><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">.<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Fethullah Gulen is a Green Card holding,
moderate Turkish cleric who lives in voluntary exile in Pennsylvania US, since
1998. He </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">leads from exile
a popular movement called Hizmet – </span><span lang="EN-IN">"a moderate,
pro-Western brand of Sunni Islam that appeals to many well-educated and
professional Turks" according to CNN. </span><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">For decades he was a close confidant of President Erdogan and was one of
the key factors in Erdogan’s AK Party winning three elections – in 2001, 2006
and 2011. They fell out in 2013 on issues of corruption. </span><span lang="EN-IN">"As someone who suffered under multiple military coups during
the past five decades, it is especially insulting to be accused of having any link
to such an attempt. I categorically deny such accusations," Gulen said. In
an interview with CNN at the time, a top official from Erdogan's ruling AKP
party called the Gulen movement a "fifth column" that had infiltrated
the Turkish Military, police force and judiciary. Says writer Ahmet Sik who
wrote the book "The Imam's Army," which took a critical look at the
Gulen movement<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">"On the one side, there is the Gulen
community, a dark and opaque power that can damage the most powerful
administration in Turkish history. And on the other side, you have an
administration that under the guise of fighting this community can and has
suspended all legal and democratic principles."<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Erdogan’s
AKP is the second Islamic oriented Party in power, after </span><span lang="EN-IN">Erbakan of the Welfare Party </span><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">was forced to resign. So Erdogan was extremely circumspect in his first
tenure. His confidence grew with his second tenure and he began to meddle in
promotion policy and retribution against the Army. In 2007, when his choice of
President was resented by the Army, he didn’t acquiesce. Instead he held a
closed door meeting with the Chief of Staff and went ahead anyway. In his third
tenure, Erdogan was a confident PM and he took on the Generals. He even
convened a trial in 2012 of the Generals who conducted the 1997 coup. He curbed
Press freedom, was against Jews and Christians, against alcohol, reformed
Labour Laws and considerably improved the economy, brought inflation down and
reduced the CAD and foreign debt. Turkey’s economy became debt-free and Erdogan
felt he had the political freedom to Islamise the Country further. And his
authoritarianism grew. But in the last three years, Turkey’s economy has taken
a dramatic downturn for the worse. In the </span><span lang="EN-IN">2013 Gezi
Park protests against the perceived authoritarianism of Erdogan and his
policies, starting from a small sit-in in Istanbul in defence of a City park.</span><sup><span lang="EN-IN" style="font-size: 9.5pt;"> </span></sup><span lang="EN-IN"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>After the police's intense reaction with tear
gas, the protests grew each day. Faced by the largest mass protest in a decade,
Erdogan made this controversial remark in a televised speech: "The police
were there yesterday, they are there today, and they will be there
tomorrow." After weeks of clashes in the streets of Istanbul, his
government at first apologized to the protestors</span><sup><span lang="EN-IN" style="font-size: 9.5pt;"> </span></sup><span lang="EN-IN">and called for a plebiscite,
but then ordered a crackdown on the protesters. The stage was set for Military
intervention.</span><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">Erdogan’s Choices<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Erdogan’s first choice,
which he’s implementing speedily, is to use the failed coup as a means to
consolidate his position, curb </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">press and other freedoms further, and become even more Autocratic</span><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">. He has accepted the failed coup as a blank
cheque to arrest anybody he feels like, in a virtual witch hunt, without any
reasonable cause. His statement </span><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">“They will pay a heavy price for
this. This uprising is a gift from God to us because this will be a reason to
cleanse our Army”</span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">
is extremely telling. His sacking or arrest of over 2750 Judges, about 20% of
Turkey’s Judiciary is baffling. How were the Judges involved in the coup? His
arrest of thousands of military and Police officers is fraught with danger.
This includes two of his three Field Army Commanders – of the 2<sup>nd</sup>
and 3<sup>rd</sup> Field Armies. The Commander of the 1<sup>st</sup> Field Army
was promoted to Army Chief. No Army will accept the public humiliation of its
officers, especially the seniormost ones lightly. Proclamations by both the
President and PM of the loyalty and courage of the rest of its Army is unlikely
to assuage the tensions within. Erdogan has shrewdly asked the people to remain
on the streets for the next one week. He obviously fears a second coup to
finish the incomplete and botched job.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Turkish
politics and society have been extremely polarised and the failed coup is a <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>signal for Erdogan</span><span lang="EN-IN"> to
be more inclusive and democratic. He has to eschew his authoritarian tendencies
and rely more on Institutions. His grandiose plans like shifting into the<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>'Ak Saray' Presidential Palace, one of the
largest in the world and to cut down all the trees in the Gezi Park and build a
grand mosque, which sparked off the protests, have severely dented his
popularity and image. The Kemalists (which includes the Military) and the
secular liberals need to be taken on board, or at least placated. A successful
coup could well be a disaster for Turkey, throwing the Country into turbulent
strife – between the Islamists and the rest – an unwinnable war for both and
something the World least needs in this already troubled region. Turkey can yet
prove that it is the model of a democratic Islamic State. The question is –
does Erdogan have the Statesmanship to do it?</span></div>
StraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971909162132256912.post-73643028216168616922014-11-06T13:43:00.001+05:302014-11-06T14:04:58.393+05:30PROHIBITION IN KERALA : A RETROGRADE STEP
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">PROHIBITION IN KERALA : A RETROGRADE
STEP <o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">BY AJIT NAIR<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The proposal to
impose Prohibition in Kerala is a retrograde step indeed. It may possibly help
in winning the next election, as any emotive and divisive step could (and it is
both), but the State will pay a heavy price – in the short term certainly, and
maybe for decades to come. It’s certainly not a well-thought through decision. It
is as if politicians refuse to learn lessons from the bitter experiences of
other States in India and of other Countries. Kerala has the highest per capita
consumption of alcohol in India and <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">steps must be taken to curb it</i></b> – but
to impose Prohibition is to throw the baby out with the bathwater; a
dangerously simplistic solution to Alcoholism.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Oommen Chandy’s
stated aims are laudable – they relate to crime, health; and most notably
productivity. And so too is his unstated aim – to prevent the poor from wasting
their meagre emoluments on alcohol to the detriment of their family’s
well-being. As also drunken ill-treatment of wives, who presumably will all
vote for the Congress. But his method smacks of a sheer desire to win the
upcoming election and then repeal Prohibition when its widespread ill-effects start
to become tangible, since he’s too intelligent not to know the consequences.
And since he’s prepared no grounds by taking other actions to address the
problems he mentions.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The case of the
United States of America is illustrative. They imposed Prohibition in 1920 till
1933. It led to the rise of “La Cosa Nostra”, an FBI pseudonym for the Mafia,
who amassed so much wealth and power during those years that they dominated
American crime for most of the 20</span><sup><span style="font-size: small;">th</span></sup><span style="font-size: large;"> Century. When Prohibition was
repealed in 1933, their vast assets (money and the well-organised Syndicates)
were astutely redeployed in prostitution, narcotics, extortion and in every
other aspect of organised crime, including organised murder. Their power
weakened only in the late 20</span><sup><span style="font-size: small;">th</span></sup><span style="font-size: large;"> Century with the sensational disclosures
and testimony of Joe Valachi, a Syndicate member, who broke the Mob’s ‘omerta’,
the code of silence. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">And drinking in USA
in the Prohibition years certainly didn’t stop – it merely reduced marginally and
went underground, leading to large-scale smuggling, huge loss of revenue for
the State (but a spurt in revenue for Canada and Mexico), a rise in home-made
‘stills’ and spurious liquor (and consequently deaths from it), increased crime
because of gang and turf wars, a surge in costs and potency of liquor (because
of reduced availability), problems of law-enforcement (including massive corruption
among politicians and law enforcement agencies) and the end of Self-help
societies. Prohibition created a black market that competed with the formal
economy, in sheer size and volume – unseen and below the surface, but
virulently malevolent.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">With such
well-documented evidence available on the destructive nature of Prohibition,
it’s a wonder that first Andhra Pradesh and then Haryana briefly experimented
with and then quickly repealed Prohibition, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">after</i></b> starting to experience
the same consequences. Worse in their cases, because a Country can seal its
borders to some extent; a State cannot. A classic case of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“a fool learns from his own
experiences, a wise man learns from the experience of others”.</i></b> </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Gujarat is the
only State in India that has had an unbroken Prohibition law since its creation
in May 1960, presumably to honour its greatest citizen – Mahatma Gandhi. From
all the written evidence available, Gujarat faces the same problems that the US
did (albeit, in lesser measure) and reportedly, alcohol is freely available in
the State. Because there is no excise duty on alcohol, IMFL (regular brands) in
Gujarat is cheaper than in the rest of the Country inspite of being smuggled in
(unlike in the US, where it became costlier – because Duty on alcohol in India
is very high; at 30 – 50 %). Today, Prohibition is so deeply entrenched and such
a lucrative business for all the important players, including politicians and
the law enforcement agencies, that it can never be lifted.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Tamil Nadu,
which had Prohibition since even before Independence and lifted it briefly in
the 70’s, 80’s and the 90’s, finally repealed it in 2001. Excise Minister
Viswanathan informed the Assembly in August this year “the State government is
aware of the ills of liquor, but it allows regulated sales only to prevent
hooch tragedies, and because of the impracticality of total prohibition. With
no prohibition in force in the neighbouring states, Tamil Nadu cannot go for
it, as it would result in flow of liquor into the state from Kerala, Puducherry
and Karnataka.” Shortly, it will be a flow from TN to Kerala, since only three
districts in Kerala do not have a contiguous border with Tamil Nadu (or
Karnataka).</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">In AP, Chief
Minister N T Rama Rao imposed prohibition in the State on January 16, 1995 and
his son-in-law Chandrababu Naidu continued the policy after taking over as Chief
Minister by dethroning NTR. But on April 1, 1997, Naidu lifted Prohibition. His
contention was that the sale of liquor was fetching as much as Rs 3,000 crore
per annum to the State and that could be spent on various welfare schemes in
the State (and drinkers be damned !!). In fact, during the Prohibition years,
AP went into debt and had to borrow at prohibitive rates from private banks.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">Does Kerala insist on wanting to be the
next crucible of this vitiating experiment ? Which has invariably failed ?
Can’t it learn from AP and from the most recent failure – Haryana ?<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Prohibition was imposed
between 1996 and 1998 for a period of 19 months by Chief Minister Bansi Lal,
based upon an election promise he had made to his voters. The illegal trade in
liquor from Uttar Pradesh and Punjab spawned a mafia-like network that had the
protection of politicians in the state. After a drubbing in the Lok Sabha
elections for Bansi Lal's HVP, prohibition was reversed in Haryana. To offset
the loss of revenue, the government raised taxes and fees for various
state-provided services – power tariff was increased by 10-50%, bus fares by
25%, and petrol sales tax by 3%. New taxes were levied on businesses and
self-employed people. There was an alarming increase in deaths, resulting from
the consumption of spurious liquor especially by the poor. Illicit brewing and
liquor smuggling into the State became one of the biggest industries in the
state.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The effect of
Prohibition on Law enforcement is extreme. When politicians need money to fight
elections, they turn to the Mafia and thereafter become indebted to them and
protect them. Honest policemen register myriad cases against violators, while
dishonest ones feather their nest. The Judicial system breaks down – in the
face of thousands of complaints, and prosecution of the guilty is rare. Since
there is no special Police force to fight Prohibition, demands on them become exorbitant.
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Law
enforcement therefore becomes the first casualty and Prohibition can never be
effectively enforced.</i></b></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Occasional,
casual or moderate drinking is certainly not ethically or morally wrong by any reasonable
standards, even of health (though not by some religious standards). In the
absence of alcohol – ganja, heroin and other psychotropic substances will gain
currency. And these will have a much greater negative impact, in addition to
being cheaper. The ways to counter the impact of Alcoholism are laid out by the
WHO – education, banning of advertising (even ambiguous advertising, which is
prevalent), age limits, time limits and availability, and increasing social
awareness are some of the methods advocated. In Kerala, Labour reforms are
sorely needed – to induce some industrialization and are the solution to low
productivity and unemployment – since Tourism, on which Kerala is heavily
dependent will take a huge hit, because of Prohibition. In a lose-lose
situation, the State will lose heavily on revenue, and illegal hooch makers,
smugglers and distributors will gain immensely and the poor will suffer. Oommen
Chandy’s stated laudable aims relating to crime, health and productivity can
never be achieved. Crime will increase, and neither health nor productivity
will be affected. No hard-core drinker will give up, only the moderates, who in
any case were doing no harm – to themselves or to others.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The “Kerala
Model” has unique social positives, because while its GDP and per capita income
are low even by Indian standards, its Human Indices are more akin to the USA
than to India. It is this ‘Model’ which made the UNDP work on HDI as the basic
for developmental policies, rather than GDP. Even the Millennium Development
Goals incorporate many of the “Kerala Model's” unique features. It is these enormous
social strengths that eradicated illiteracy, that the Govt must work on to
combat the scourge of Alcohol, rather than banning it – an easy but <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">totally ineffective</b> method, smacking of
ulterior motives. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">In the final
analysis, making illegal what many people really like to do is
counter-productive. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">If someone wants to drink – rich or poor, then he will drink – come hell
or high water. The desire to not want to drink or to drink in moderation must
come from within and can never be imposed from without.<o:p></o:p></i></b></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">The Goal of the Govt and of Social Reform
groups must be to try and instill this desire in the common man.<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
StraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971909162132256912.post-37799930111021791322014-10-12T20:30:00.001+05:302014-10-12T20:30:38.104+05:30THE ISLAMIC STATE : AN UPDATE – US vs THE IS (ISLAMIC STATE)
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">THE ISLAMIC STATE : AN UPDATE – US vs
THE IS <o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">(ISLAMIC STATE)<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">BY BRIGADIER AJIT NAIR (Retired)<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">In one of the
most <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">significant</b> developments in the
Middle East in recent years, a Coalition led by the US, carried out air strikes
against <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“Islamic</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">State”</b> targets in Syria, on Monday, 22</span><sup><span style="font-size: small;">nd</span></sup><span style="font-size: large;">
Sept. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Game-changing</b>, it may be
called – because the Coalition consisted of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">five Sunni Arab Countries</i></b>,
apart from the only Western power – the US. They were Saudi Arabia, Jordan,
UAE, Bahrain and Qatar. A remarkable diplomatic achievement by the US. Apart
from Qatar, who was in a supportive role, the other four <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">actually participated in the
attacks</i></b>. This is an unprecedented move and it sends a powerful message
to the Islamic State, the Arab nations and to the entire World. That the
Islamic State is illegitimate and a misnomer – it is neither Islamic nor a
State, and more importantly – not representative of Arabs or of Muslims. In
days and weeks to come, this message will reverberate across Islamic
communities and Countries across the World, especially because of the
involvement of Saudi Arabia – the home of Islam.</span></div>
<span style="font-size: large;"> The scale of these
attacks was also unprecedented in this ongoing War, starting with 40 Tomahawk
Cruise missiles, followed by the first ever use of the most advanced fighter
aircraft ever, the F-22 Raptor, with the third wave being dominated by the
Coalition partners. The targets were diverse – Islamic State HQs (Raqqa),
training camps, logistics and communications centres, barracks and the Raqqa
oil-fields, apart from armoured and other vehicles. The US (and France) carried
out about 190 attacks over four weeks in Iraq – this single night had as many.
While Raqqa was the focus of the attacks, other Syrian cities like Deir Ezzor,
Al Hasakah and Abu Kamal were also hit, stretching from Aleppo in the West to Raqqa
on the Euphrates. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The War against the
Islamic State has now well and truly begun</b>. And according to the Pentagon
it was just the “beginning of a sustained campaign” which could go on for
years. And maybe eventually, some “boots on the ground” (whose?) – although
hotly denied by the US.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"> Another
significant attack was against the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Khorasan</b>,
an Al Qaeda splinter group (this attack was by the US only) in an area just
East of Aleppo. So who are the Khorasan and why are they important ? They are a
break-away Group of the Al Qaeda, who were based in the Pakistani tribal areas,
who shifted to Syria recently. They consist of veteran Al Qaeda fighters from
Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen. Their Aim is to attack the US and Europe. The
historical region of Khorasan comprises parts of present-day Iran, Afghanistan,
Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan in prehistoric and early Islamic times, hence their
name. And according to the US <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">– “ an
attack in Europe or the Homeland was imminent”</b>. Another major danger of the
Khorasan is their attempt to recruit Western IS fighters – to carry out attacks
in their respective home Country. Considering there now about 15,000 fighters
from US, Europe, the Russian Federation, India and Islamic Countries, this is a
serious threat. No visas required, just a plane ticket.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>So Who Didn’t Fight?</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The
two biggest Countries in the region – Turkey and Egypt. Why ? Turkey – possibly
because 49 of their Diplomats (including wives and children), were captives in
Mosul. They were released on 21</span><sup><span style="font-size: small;">st</span></sup><span style="font-size: large;"> Sept, and hence they were not
included in the planning and execution of the attacks of 22</span><sup><span style="font-size: small;">nd</span></sup><span style="font-size: large;"> Sept.
They are now willing – according to Recep Tayyip Erdogan, their Prime Minister
and must form a crucial part of any future plans. Egypt, who are suffering
Islamic pangs, because of their recent political events, decided to stay out. Britain
and France, natural members of any US led coalition also didn’t participate.
Why ? David Cameroon didn’t find political consensus and the French didn’t get
an invitation from Syria (which they got from Iraq) !! A valid point by the
French, because the strikes in Iraqi territory had legal sanction, while the
ones in Syria did not. In fact, Syria was not involved in the co-ordination,
merely informed via the UN.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>What’s the Future?</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Now that the
seriousness of intentions of the US and Arab coalition partners against the
Islamic State is clear, this is a long-term fight to the finish. And with very
little support from across the world, (except for young committed fighters from
just about everywhere), the Islamic State’s <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">days are numbered</i></b>. Stuck
in a limited geographical area, their ability to hide tanks and Artillery is
limited. Any Military-like actions against either Iraq or Syria are ruled out
and only guerrilla operations are possible.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The sudden
influx of two lakh Syrian Kurds into Turkey, on the day of the attacks was
either fortuitous or part of the plan. It reduced the chances of collateral
damage and now prevents the IS from hiding themselves or their military
hardware within a civilian population. The return of the Turkish diplomats (a
secret deal or ransom?) also cleared the way for Turkish participation. And
this is important. Democratic Turkey has an Islamist Party in power and Turkish
actions will have sanction from the people. It suits Turkey to vanquish the IS,
so that Kurdish refugees can return to Syria. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The fight
against the IS must continue, at different levels. Financial sanctions,
reclaiming the Islamic space from the fundamentalists, a ban on weapons
reaching them and making it difficult for fighters to reach or leave
Syria/Iraq.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Finally, the US
insistence on arming the Free Syrian Army (Sunni rebels) and removing Assad is
a debatable decision. The removal of any Dictator is a laudable aim, but it
could plunge Syria into a huge Sectarian crisis. We saw it happening in Iraq,
Egypt and Libya. And it is a moot point if all the foreign fighters have
migrated to the ranks of the IS or are still fighting alongside the rebels.
Arming them would be disastrous. Apparently, the Arab world is not yet ready
for Western style Democracy. If they could reform and embrace globalization, like
China has done, the glories of its civilization, respect and pride would similarly
surely return. This is something they steadfastly refuse to do. That is the
root of the problem that the World is grappling with.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">President Obama
addressed the Nation (and the World). You can watch the address at http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/09/23/watch-live-obama-delivers-a-statement-on-air-strikes-in-syria/.
(Strangely this 41 minute video doesn’t start until 36.45 – so just FF uptil
then).</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">President Obama’s
Address to the UN was also seminal and gripping. The guy can really speak well.
This may well have been his best speech ever. No issues evaded, no problems
skipped, solutions clearly articulated – albeit at a philosophical level.
Hard-hitting words, spoken with candour and appearing to come from the heart.
It helps, that he has a Muslim father and step-father. His harsh words against
Muslims were taken at face value. Bush or Clinton wouldn’t have had such an
impact.</span></div>
StraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971909162132256912.post-850093127989471232014-09-25T20:47:00.000+05:302014-09-25T20:50:47.104+05:30THE ISLAMIC STATE : A BRIEF ANALYSIS
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">THE ISLAMIC STATE : A BRIEF ANALYSIS<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">BY BRIGADIER AJIT NAIR (RETD)<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The rapid rise
of ‘<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The Islamic State’</b> has brought a
disturbing paradigm shift into an already troubled Middle East. So who are
they, what are their Aims and Capabilities and what could the possible course
of events be, over the next few months and years ? Any analysis now would
require frequent revisions as events unfold on virtually a daily basis. But let
me try anyway.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The information we have about them or their Leader is scant, and from
diverse sources. To summarise – they comprise Sunni Muslims of Iraq and Syria,
sworn to establish an Islamic Caliphate, under their Supreme Leader <b><span lang="EN-IN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-IN;">Abu Bakr</span></b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-IN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-IN;"> al-<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Baghdadi</span></span></b>,
now calling himself <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“The Caliph Ibrahim”</b>.
They have been augmented by fighters from numerous Countries, including UK,
Germany, France, Holland, USA – and India, amongst others. All told, they today
reportedly number more than 10,000 fighters. They have captured arms (including
tanks/ICVs from the retreating Iraqi Army) and assets worth about $ 2 Billion,
making them the richest Jihadi organisation. Baghdadi is a fierce looking
fighter and<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>tactician, which infuses in him
more appeal than has the Al Qaeda Chief – the mild-looking, bespectacled Ayman
al-Zawahiri, an Islamic theologian. Al Qaeda has condemned them – ostensibly
for their brutality, but in reality it’s more likely to be a turf war.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Started in 2003, to oppose the US invasion, they have steadily grown in
numbers and commitment, after they announced themselves in 2006 or so. So they
are neither a new nor an unknown phenomena. Just ignored. Their rapid ascent drew
strength (and Headlines) from the Israel/Hamas war, the Syrian rebellion and
the political turmoil in Iraq, although not directly linked to any of them.
They have reportedly declared the Hamas as Apostates and have vowed to destroy
them, before tackling Israel. They have harmed the rebellion against Assad by
attacking genuine Syrian rebels and thinning their ranks by getting recruits
into their own militia. Prime Minister Al Maliki’s obdurate refusal to run an
inclusive Govt in Iraq has considerably exacerbated the Shia-Sunni divide and
consequently Baghdadi’s development and short-term Aims. However, the new Govt,
led by President Fuad Masum (a Kurd) and Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi (a moderate
Shia) may be a game changer. While many key posts went to the majority Shia
community, Sunnis and Kurds were also well represented with Saleh al-Mutlaq (a
Sunni) being<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dy PM.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Aim.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Their long-term Aim is to establish an “<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Islamic Caliphate”,</b> under a single
Leader, in the Levant. Their morphing name indicates how their Aim has evolved.
From AQI (Al Qaeda in Iraq) to ISI (Islamic State of Iraq) to ISIS (Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria) to ISIL (Islamic Sate of Iraq and the Levant) and on
29 June 2014, to ‘<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The Islamic State’</b>.
It’s interesting to note that their Aim has now expanded out of the Levant, to
include the entire world. A measure of their confidence. Their short-term Aim
is to establish their dominance over other Sunni groups, especially those who
do not follow the extremist Salafist doctrine and to fight a sectarian war
against Shias. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>The Levant.</u></b> The <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Levant</b> core region historically
comprised of present-day Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Cyprus and
Hatay (a province in southern Turkey, on the Mediterranean coast). Expanded to
include the Sinai and Iraq and finally the entire territory of Turkey and Egypt.
Interestingly, the British had an English Levant Company, founded in 1581 to
trade with the Ottoman Empire.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Capabilities.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Never assess an adversary on his Aim.
Assess him on his Capabilities. Aims can change overnight, capabilities cannot.
The ‘The Islamic State’ has about ten to twenty thousand fighters, captured
arms, adequate recourses and deep, almost fanatical commitment. Their well
trained Army has already routed the Iraqi Army and adversarial Syrian rebels. And
captured many major towns, including Raqqa in Syria (their HQ) and Mosul (the
second city of Iraq). So what can the they do today. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Frankly, in their current avatar, with their current resources – not
much more.</b> But their real threat lies in their ability to attract new
volunteers from all over the World, using their appeal and social media skills.
This will also cause disturbances in host Countries, as we saw in The Hague
recently. Open demonstrations, flaunting the black Islamic State flag. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">So they’ve done a lot, since they burst out of their relative anonymity
in June this year. So what else can they do ? Let’s see their SWOT analysis.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Strengths.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Firstly, their immediate resources of
committed fighters, captured arms and ammunition, equipment and vast wealth (if
they hold on to the N Iraqi oilfields). Secondly, their insidious appeal of
being able to attract large numbers of volunteers from across the World. And one
of the reasons is the promise of a Caliphate, with a charismatic Leader. And
the fact that they are actually holding territory and administering a virtual
Country, which no force is likely to be able to easily recapture. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Weaknesses.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>For the first time, a militant
organisation is fighting openly, a conventional war, confining themselves to a
geographical area. Which is easily attackable. From the ground and from the
air. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">This is their biggest weakness. </b>While
the Al Qaeda’s terror tactics work because of their nebulous existence, any
terror attacks by The Islamic State outside their borders is likely to lead to
massive retaliation, by any number of enemies, of which they have created plenty.
A case in point is the increased US strikes in retaliation to the killing of the
two US journalists. They have no known sources of replenishing their arms,
ammunition and equipment, since they’re shunned even by the Al Qaeda. A self-declared
Sunni Caliphate, they are surrounded by Shia ruled Countries. In the West by
Syria, a Shia (Alawite) dominated and ruled Sunni majority, (however, even the
Syrian Sunnis are fighting them) in the South by a Shia dominated and Shia majority
Iraq and in the East, by Shia Iran. The first two have an Army of about 250,000
each and Iran of 800,000. With plenty of tanks, artillery and a reasonably
modern Air Force. And in the North, they have Turkey, a formidable NATO member.
And the Iraqi Kurds, with their Peshmerga (militia) are their immediate
Northern adversaries. Fighting an active war on three fronts (less the Iranian
one) is an impossibility, even with enhanced resources. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Current enemies.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Currently, The Islamic State is actively fighting
only the Peshmerga, who are aided by US air power, with skirmishes in Syria and
Iraq. In Syria, there are three forces fighting each other – that is, the
Syrian State vs the Syrian rebels and The Islamic State. This stalemate can
only be broken by Assad, if he chooses to do so. He is more likely to wait and
watch his Sunni rivals fight and weaken each other. The Iraqi Govt has lost
much of its US support and till their political squabbles are over, can make no
positive move. However, they are unlikely to be pushed any further South. Their
Army, aided by Shia militias is likely to secure Baghdad and areas around,
witness the bombing on 22</span><sup><span style="font-size: small;">nd</span></sup><span style="font-size: large;"> August in a Sunni Mosque in Diyala.
Skirmishes will continue. Iran is plagued by problems of its own and is
unlikely to make any move, for the present.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Current backers and financiers.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>No Country overtly supports The Islamic
State. Their covert financiers are reportedly wealthy individuals, mosques and
charities in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and possibly Qatar. However, their
declaration of a Caliphate with a credible Leader appeals to Sunni Muslim
fundamentalists worldwide. And there are numerous pledges of support from
Indonesia to Kashmir to Saudi Arabia and from Europe and the US.</span></div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>US Options.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The US have two major restraining factors – one, their decision not to
get actively involved in Iraq again (no “boots on the ground”), and two, a
commitment to bring stability to a united Iraq. The latter is a virtual
impossibility, since the chances of a Shia-Sunni rapprochement in Iraq (or for
that matter, in Syria) are extremely bleak and the Iraqi Kurds have virtually
declared independence. But that is the stated position of the US and they will
stick to it unless the situation changes dramatically. Any major increase in
air/drone-strikes, which causes “collateral damage” to civilians will turn the
entire Sunni population against them and by inference against the Iraqi Govt.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Enemies of your Friends and
Enemies of your Enemies.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Are
your friend’s enemies automatically your enemies? And do enemies of your bitter
enemies automatically become your friends? In the Arab world, as the US is
finding out –not necessarily. Their biggest enemy in this region used to be the
Syrian Govt under Assad and they were about to assist the rebels against him
and to start air attacks against him. Till the Islamic State suddenly surfaced.
So they dropped that plan and instead are attacking the Islamic State, who
include many Syrian rebels, who they were about to arm ! Which anyway would
have been a disaster, since the rebels were infiltrated by foreign fighters, at
the behest of the Al Qaeda. Right now, the US is helping the Shias against the
Sunnis, which is frowned upon by their allies – Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and
Bahrain (though not if they keep their actions <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>strictly restricted to fighting the Islamic
State) and applauded by Iran and Syria – their sworn enemies. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">They are also helping the Peshmerga (Iraqi Kurds), which is frowned upon
by their NATO ally Turkey, who are worried about a demand for a more inclusive
Kurdistan by Turkish Kurds, who they have been repressing for decades. A Kurdistan
in this area would be appreciated by Europe and Israel, who have a large
Kurdish diaspora (about 1.5 million), who presumably would migrate there. All
told, there are about 30 million Kurds (who are basically Iranian Sunni
Muslims), distributed in Iraq, Syria, Turkey, the Russian Federation, Europe
and Israel. Any significant success by the Peshmerga would open yet another can
of worms in this troubled region.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">For the US/UK, to look at this conflict from an American or NATO
perspective (which they are currently doing) would be short-sighted indeed and
the problems in the Middle East would mutate and acquire new and dangerous
dimensions and complexities, so-far unseen and unanalysed. The only Super-power
should behave as a World leader and not as a protector of American interests.
If they want to take a world leadership position. The US is at an important
cross-road here. They’ve left a mess in Afghanistan and Iraq – will they do it
again?</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12pt 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Verily they are faced with a Hobson’s choice. Every option is fraught
with larger unforeseen implications. Extreme caution and introspection is
needed here. Diplomacy before military action. Any “Coalition of the Willing” (formed
after the NATO Summit in Wales), which has only NATO Countries is meaningless.
It <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">has
</i></b><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>to include the Arabs and Iran. A
holistic right-brained solution is needed, instead of a bits-and-pieces
left-brained military/strategic one. The consequences for the World are
enormous. We wait with bated breath.</span></div>
StraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971909162132256912.post-8147829384637725862014-08-23T20:33:00.000+05:302014-08-24T06:45:09.890+05:30FOOTBALL THE ARCHAIC GAME : ROOTED IN TIME<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 18pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 14.0pt;">FOOTBALL THE ARCHAIC GAME : ROOTED IN TIME<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 18pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 14.0pt;">(By Ajit Nair : Strictly Personal Views)<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Most
games evolve with time – to keep in sync with the changing circumstances of
modernity – and the last 20 years have seen the greatest changes that humanity has
ever seen. Sports too have changed immeasurably – changes in equipment, in
stadia, in surfaces, in the efficiency and reach of TV coverage, in commercialization,
in the fitness and resolve of sportsmen and the high stakes involved, with the consequent
competitiveness. But the greatest change has been in the modern
generation’s<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>attitude to life – and to
sports. The last generation was used to an easy-paced, but skillful and
aesthetic way of playing a game. The younger generation wants an instant fix to
everything – they want speed, strength and a quick result. Some games re-invented
themselves to remain relevant, others merely changed their format or rules.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Cricket
was about to die of old age, but a blood transfusion of One Dayers to Tests
saved the day, and pandered to the impatience of modernity. 20-20 came in even
before the One Dayers reached adulthood and proved to be an instant success. In
Billiards, old-timers made thousand point breaks – today each game finishes at
150 – to counter the challenge of colourful and fast-paced Snooker – and
Snooker itself has introduced a 6 ball variant. Hockey changed umpteen rules,
some to break the hegemony of India/Pakistan and to suit the
Europeans/Australians and some to speed up the game – but all for the better. Squash,
Badminton and Table Tennis changed their scoring formats and rode the crest of
the wave. Some games were free flowing and fast-paced to start with, and had to
make minimal changes – Basketball (3 pointers, triple free throws etc) and
Tennis (line call challenges, tie-breaks) amongst others. And most Games
enthusiastically embraced Technology.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>But
the most popular game of them all – Football – remains rooted in obstinate and
arrogant anachronism. Footer is such an entertaining and exciting global
obsession, that its popularity has survived its archaic resistance to change. Everybody
can and does play it and everybody loves to watch it. As Liverpool FC manager
Bill Shankly famously said “Football is not a matter of life and death – it is
far more serious than that….” The Footballing mania may well survive its
restrictive and out-dated rules and regulations – but who knows when the modern
youth just switches off. FIFA and King Sepp must think proactively – the
writing is not yet on the wall, but it doesn’t take much time to fetch the
chalk. The youth of today are demanding, but not too forgiving. Changes are
required not just to entertain, but also to remove arbitrary and patently
unfair decisions, to reward the better, more skillful and hard-working team, the
more talented player – on the day, and to remove cynical gamesmanship. And
finally, to use the benefits of technology to improve the quality of refereeing.
In this World Cup, goal-line technology is being used, but video referrals and
the full gamut of available technology is not. They must be used, without
slowing the game down too much.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">My take on what is wrong and what
needs to be done, if Football is to remain the King of Sports. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Red cards/Yellow cards.</u></b><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The biggest Anachronism. Both Cards have completely unintended
consequences. Invariably, Yellow Cards are too mild and Red Cards are too
harsh. And the worst thing is that the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">time</i></b> at which they are given has a
huge impact on the game. A Yellow Card early in the game has no immediate
effect, but puts the player on tenterhooks for the rest of the game, while a
Yellow Card near the end has almost no immediate effect (only long-term). A Red
Card at the beginning kills the game and a Red Card for the same offence near
the end has very little effect. Two Yellow Cards for two ‘not too serious’
fouls – equals the Draconian Red Card !!! And both illogically carry their
effect onto the next game as well. A Red Card – and you miss the next game. A
Yellow in two successive games and you miss the third.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Both Yellow and
Red Cards <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">must have an immediate effect</i></b> and it should be <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">even</i></b>
at any stage of the game and always commensurate to the gravity of the offence.
Today, there are many different fouls of differing gravity, but only three
types of penalties – Free Kicks, a Penalty and the two Cards. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">My
solution – an immediate three or five minute send-off for a Yellow Card and a
10 minute (or 15/20/30 – at the discretion of the Referee) send-off for a Red
Card. And NO carry-forward at all. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Off-sides.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Off-sides
have their origin in the late 18</span><sup><span style="font-size: small;">th</span></sup><span style="font-size: large;"> Century in English Public Schools.
They’re archaic in the 21</span><sup><span style="font-size: small;">st</span></sup><span style="font-size: large;">. They’re completely incomprehensionable
to the average watcher and barely comprehensionable to the informed laymen
(like me). Many an off-side decision in this WC has been patently wrong,
denying what looked like a sure-shot goal. On 30 June 2014, I was astounded to
hear a Legend of the Game, Robbie Fowler say “I’m not sure about the off-side
Rule, but I think that should have been a Goal” (France –Nigeria). Laying the
off-side trap is fraught with danger – suppose the linesman gets it wrong ? And
beating the off-side trap has become a artificial and technical expertise,
unnatural to the beautiful game. Absolutely no reason for them. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">I say
– abolish the Off-side Rule, Hockey has already done that. Let the poacher wait
in ambush !! It will add a delicious element of surprise….<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Back passes,</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Back
passes, especially to the goal-keeper, seriously detract from the flow and
beauty of Football. To some extent, FIFA recognised that 20 odd years ago and
banned Goalies from handling a ball that was back-passed by the foot (as
opposed to the head or body). But the bane of back-passes continue. It slows
down the game and leads to audience fatigue. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">Back
passes to the Penalty area must be banned. In addition, back-passes from ahead
of the Centre-line to behind it must also be banned (like in Basketball).<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Throw-ins/Free Kicks.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>A
throw-in is an unnecessary and artificial expertise, which slows down the game.
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Instead
of throw-ins, have a kick in, to be quickly taken by the closest player
(instead of waiting for the ‘so-called’ expert to arrive – and his speed of arrival
depends on whether his Team is ahead or behind !!). And both for Free Kicks and
for the Kick-in the player must be allowed to carry the ball, instead of
looking for a pass (again, like in Hockey). </i></b></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Time of play/Injury time.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The
clock keeps ticking when the Referee calls a foul. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Why?</i></b> Then extra time is
given to compensate the delays. Then players delay during extra time and the Referee
has to re-calculate. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">Why
not stop the clock every time the play is held up and blare a bugle, when time
ends – at exactly 45/90 minutes (like in Basketball)………….Time to be kept by the
Time-keeper, and not by the Referee.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Replacements/Substitutions.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The
Replacements/substitutions rule has remained unchanged for Decades. Three substitutions
per match. We see slow Football and tired legs near the end of every match,
especially during extra-time. And if a player is injured after the
substitutions are made ? What then ? Play a man short ? Patently unfair. Hockey
has a rolling substitution rule, which is so wonderful (also Basketball). Fast
paced action till the very end. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">My
take on it - Substitute all you want – to keep each player fresh. And to give
every player a chance. And to cater for minor injuries, which necessitate a
rest or treatment for a few minutes. It will also give great strategic legroom
to the Coach (Imagine : Van Persie starts; the Dutch two goals up in 20 minutes
– withdrawn for a defensive player. The enemy equalizes, Van Persie back…..and
so on). Games will oscillate between all-out attack and balanced defence.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Challenges.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Any challenge, especially from the rear
where the ball is not targeted, only the man, must invite immediate retribution
– in the form of a send-off (for a limited duration). It will act as a huge
deterrent and prevent unnecessary injuries. Any callous, professional foul must
come to the attention of the FIFA Disciplinary Committee (like the Suarez
‘bite’). Remember <b>Andoni Goikoetxea, </b>"The Butcher from Bilbao",
whose vicious tackling nearly ended the career of the sublime Maradona ?</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Video Referrals.</u></b> <span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The
reluctance to use available technology is just not understood by a lot of us.
Similar to the Goal-line technology being used for the first time, back-line
and sideline technology can be used. In addition, each Team can be given two (or
three) referrals per Half, to challenge the Referee’s call. And the dialogue
between the on-field Referee and the video Referee can be telecast, along with
the video footage being seen by the latter. In Hockey, this has generated great
interest, with the audience virtually participating ! Wrong decisions are the
bane of modern Football and leads to huge on-field animosity. Hard to blame the
Referee – he gets a split-second to make a game changing decision.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Penalty.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The
Penalty kick is too serious a matter to be left to the on–the–spot discretion
and judgement of the on-field Referee. In this World Cup, the mistakes in
awarding (or in <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">NOT</b> awarding) a
Penalty have been numerous, and the fate of a Country has been wrongly decided,
leading to National despondency. (Even Robben’s last minute Penalty award
against Mexico has been contested by many experts – like Robbie Fowler, after
watching many replays). Before awarding a Penalty, a video referral <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">must
be made compulsory</i></b> (and irrespective of a Team’s decision to challenge
it). This could be applied to Red Cards also.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Number of Referees.</u></b><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The
referee is the only one who has to run from one goal–line to the other
continuously, for the full 90 minutes (no substitutions allowed !). The
Football field is large – 100 yards and this must put a huge strain on him.
Even to the point of affecting rational decisions. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">Why
not have two Referees (like Hockey – where the Field is smaller) – one for each
Half.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;">Brigadier (Retired) Ajit Nair</span></b><a name='more'></a><br /></div>
StraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971909162132256912.post-49671780905709918232012-11-18T12:26:00.001+05:302012-11-18T12:26:32.870+05:30Ajai Shukla replies to my Response
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
Ajai Shukla's reply pasted below......</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
Dear Ajai,</div>
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Thank
you for the courtesy of a well-thought out and much more logical reply than
your sensationalistic article. <br />
<br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>At
the outset, let me clarify – I have nothing against you personally. I thought
you were a very fine TV journalist/anchor/news reader. You were articulate and balanced,
but supportive of the Army, without making it overtly obvious – thereby
retaining your credibility. But I maintain my distaste of the article in
question. It did not convey the feelings of a concerned Veteran trying to push reform
in what he thinks is a corrupt, nepotistic, intellectually deprived and
virtually dysfunctional Army – <span style="color: red;">“</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: red; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">crumbling edifice”</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">, you called it</span>. That was just
sensational journalism at its best. Which is what I seriously objected to.
There is a deep gulf between constructive criticism and destructive
disparagement.<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: red; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">“The Indian Army fish is rotting from the head.”</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> The very first sentence said it all. A
denunciation of what I still consider a very fine Army, trying to come to grips
with the ills bestowed upon it by a materialistic society consumed with power
and money, and upward mobility. Every problem that you mention, is present in
our Army in varying degrees, not one is progressing to a destructive endplay. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Grains of truth in a beach of vituperation<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">.</i></b> It’s not as if the Army doesn’t
know of its failings, it’s just trying deal with them, without creating too
much internal turbulence. Let’s give the Generals a chance without too much
adverse and thoughtless criticism, especially in public. I agree with you –
reform from within and from the top is the only option.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
I’m forwarding your
letter and this reply to all the original addressees, (in BCC), as you’ve asked
me to. This exchange of ideas is also on the Old Lawrencians Forum – I’m <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">not</b> sending this to them (I didn’t put
it there in the first place – someone else did) – too many disinterested
readers, and besides, I don’t want it to become a Sanawar vs Lovedale battle –
which it isn’t. My batch of 1969 had eight of us joining the Army (of 64
students). In my three years in the SSB – only one Lawrencian (from either
School) appeared, and he was the Bandmasters son from Lovedale (and I failed
him – regrettably). I think that’s endemic of the Army’s failure – not
attracting adequate talent from the right quarters; and it bodes ill for our
future. Which is why, running down the Army any further could well be extremely
counter-productive.</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
I shall reply to
your mail in detail – point by point, since I agree in some areas, but disagree
in many others, most of all in the method you are adopting, to force the
internal change you want. But I’m sure that you are not going to achieve that
aim, by using irrelevant issues and sarcastic and facetious language in public,
to ridicule the Army. And using exaggeration and sweeping generalizations as tools.
These are the causes of my angst.</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The
Army is nowhere near fulfilling <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the dire
prophesies of its naysayers.<o:p></o:p></i></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
With Regards </div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
Ajit</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">P.S.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Gen
HS Panag wrote, disagreeing with both of us. Check out his blog at http://rwac48.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/15/.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Dear Brigadier Nair,</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Thanks for your email, which is a
critique of my article and equally of me as an individual. Since you’ve had the
courtesy to send it to me, instead of merely to people you know, I am
responding to you personally. May I request you to forward my response to all
those you addressed your critique to. It would be the honourable thing to do.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Your arguments illustrate many of
the key problems that today’s army faces. Let me list out the points you make
in what I consider their order of importance and respond to them. Your
assertions are in magenta and my answers are in navy blue:</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(a) Articles are
written on the army’s declining morals only because they sell. In comparison,
everything written about corruption amongst the babus and politicians is “just
one big yawn.” My article, like all the others, was just meant to sell the
paper.</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Firstly, the media
publishes many more articles on corruption in government and amongst
politicians than on corruption in the army. To verify this, open the newspapers
of any ten consecutive days and count how many articles deal with corruption in
the army… and you’ll get your answer.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">But that is not the
point. Regardless of the how many articles are written or not, even the army’s
greatest wellwishers admit to rising levels of corruption, sycophancy,
infighting and lack of professionalism. And this raises the larger question:
observing this trend, should we --- and I include all of us who have given many
years of our lives to the army --- bury our heads in the sand and pretend that
all is well? Or should we take on the challenge of bringing back on track the
institution that we all love?</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The path of least
resistance is: “don’t let word get out! We’ll fix the problem ourselves,
without any outsiders coming to know.”</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I call that the Wife
Beater argument: “Honey, don’t let the neighbours know. Let’s keep this
in-house. We’ll fix the problem ourselves.” Sadly, as we all know, the battered
wives who keep silent mostly continue to be beaten regularly. </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I am aware that there are
still many senior officers who are honest to the core. But there are a growing
number of corrupt, self-serving and nepotistic generals who believe that the
organisation exists to serve them rather than the other way round. The honest
and professional officers who keep silent and do nothing to restore the health
of the army are like the wife-beaters’ neighbours, who can hear the cries but
do nothing to intervene. And those like you who say, “keep this in-house” are
equally culpable. Because, as you all know deep down, the army’s internal
systems have failed to stop the rot. Sadly, ethical and moral officers like you
are amongst those who are watching quietly and justifying their inaction as
“love for the army”. </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">In the final balance, a
crime of omission is as blameworthy as a crime of commission. For everyone who
truly cares for this army, it is time to speak out in every available forum.
Because internal reform is simply not happening. If we all keep silent, the
army will inevitably be discredited in the eyes of the public, which is growing
cynical about an organisation that they have long respected. The bureaucrats
and politicians just love what is happening; gradually, they will step in and
start interfering in the army’s internal functioning. I know you don’t want to
see that day. But if you all keep silent, you will all be part responsible for
the degradation of India’s finest institution.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(b) You say our
veterans should not “denigrate” the army, but support it since “We have a host
of unresolved issues – like the OROP, the 6th Pay Commission inequities, the
CDS issue et al, but most importantly; restoring pride and honour to the
Defence Forces.”</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Sadly, our veteran
community has chosen to focus mainly on financial benefits, rather than on the
army's professionalism and ethos. I note that, in the list of “unresolved
issues”facing the army, you have put OROP and 6<sup>th</sup> Pay Commission
inequities as your top two issues.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">If that is what the
veterans believe, they are completely out of touch with what the serving officers
believe. For each outraged email from veterans like you, I have received ten
messages of approval from serving officers, particularly junior and mid-ranking
officers. They all say: “We agree completely. Keep writing. Only then will the
generals change.”</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">It would seem as if
serving officers --- who still have an immediate stake in the army’s internal
health --- are eager for professional reform. Sadly, the retired community is
focused on financial benefits; and has long ago abandoned any association with
professional issues.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The “pride and
honour”that you write about so passionately will not come from OROP or the
extension of 6<sup>th</sup> Pay Commission benefits. It will come from
enhancing the professional pride of the serving soldier, and from instilling the
confidence that the army has the ethos and training to tackle any foreseeable
challenge.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(c) You write that I
should keep silent on the “supposedly-ostentatious lifestyle” of the army
chief. The IAS, you say, lives in style, flashing their power. Therefore, the
chief is taking no more than is his due as the head of an organisation.</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Are you really, publicly,
making the argument that the IAS misuses power and, therefore, the army
leadership should do so too? I like to think that we soldiers are different and
that we hold dear our moral and professional code. </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I would have no problem
with the chief having 20 servants in his residence. Let the chief’s secretariat
take up a case for authorizing that staff (as the navy and air force does quite
routinely) and then let him flaunt the status that you apparently believe comes
from having a large retinue of servitors. But I strongly oppose the posting of
combat soldiers as sevadars/sahayaks/sentries/gardeners/area cleaners; and also
the attachment of tradesmen who have been wrested away from combat units and
formations, which in turn employ combatants for those duties.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I am appalled at the way
combatants are being misused in the army of today. And I am even more amazed
that officers, serving and retired, can pretend that will have no operational
implications. When you allow the large-scale use of combatants for in the
personal staff of officers, the message that goes out is: those tasks are more
important than combat. And that means the blunting of your combat edge.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Perhaps you and I simply
have different personal philosophies. In my code of conduct, a general who
personally pours a drink for himself and for an officer who is visiting him is
a far bigger man than one who signals to one of five waiting jawans. Sadly, in
today’s declining personal culture, senior officers have even started using
their staff officers to offer their guests a drink. And I'm talking about small
gatherings, where personal attention can easily be given.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(d) All the recent
incidents that involve men confronting their officers are “localized lack of
leadership”, not an across-the-board disciplinary crisis. That kind of thing
happens in every army, you say. </span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">You are right when you
say that each case stems from a “localized lack of leadership.” But, sadly,
this localized lack of leadership is spreading like an epidemic. Besides the
recent incidents of unarmed confrontations between officers and men, there are
also innumerable incidents of fratricide in operational areas. Of course this
happens in other armies too. But it is on the rise in the Indian Army and we
should wonder why?</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">From where does
this“local lack of leadership” originate? When you think about this, it is
obvious that the leadership crisis starts from the top, with the generals (and
here we come back to the COAS’s waiters!) behaving as if military manpower is a
resource, a perk, which exists for the comfort of officers. Do you really think
that the jawans are going to go along with this exploitative relationship
endlessly? If the officer-jawan relationship is not made more equal and less
feudal, officers are going to start getting killed by jawans even in peace
stations. And then we’ll all feel even more victimised when the media notes
this trend.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(e) The Indian army’s
courses of instruction provide a great military education that result in army
officers being “more intellectually enabled than any other profession in India…
From the Young Officers Course to Junior Command to the Staff Course to Senior
Command to Higher Command Course/LDMC to National Defence Course, no other
institution prepares their officers so thoroughly for their next
rank/assignment.”</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">You’ve got to be joking!
The military courses of instruction that you cite so approvingly --- YO’s, JC,
SC, HC, NDC --- are acknowledged by most armies as a tired, outdated route to
predictable and unimaginative thinking. Go and have an honest conversation with
a foreign officer (from a serious army) who has done one of these courses.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Give any syndicate in any
JC or SC course a tactical problem. One can predict exactly what the solutions
of 95% of them will be. These courses are designed to kill off any
innovativeness or unpredictability that the training academies might have left
alive in the officers.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Intellectual mediocrity
is not a natural characteristic of army officers. It is merely the outcome of
poor regimental grooming, where officers are not encouraged to read books, to
discuss and to dissent professionally with their seniors without seriously
endangering their careers. And when you cannot have a civilized professional
disagreement with a senior, you cannot develop a freethinking intellect. And
without that, you will always be entirely predictable. And in that case, you
will quickly die on any serious battlefield.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(f) We should encourage
only senior officers to study the 1962 war as “teaching it across the board
would be deeply distressing and de-motivating.” In any case, there is no
factual material available, since the Henderson-Brookes report is still
classified.</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">This is exactly what I
mean when I say that the army is an intellectual desert. When apparatchiks
decide that junior officers are so fragile that they cannot study a military
campaign because it “would be deeply distressing and de-motivating”, you know
you are in an intellectual desert.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">By the way,
notwithstanding the British Army’s glorious history of military successes, the
campaigns that it focuses most deeply are its most painful defeats: Gallipoli,
Balaclava, Arnhem and so on.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">But our army doesn’t want
to face the fact that we got whipped in 1962. Instead, we want to pretend that
it was only the politicians and bureaucrats that were to blame. We want to wish
away Maj Gen Pathania’s decision to evacuate Dirang without a shot being fired…
brigade commanders upsticking without a fight… and the many battalion and
company commanders that set fire to their stocks of rations and ammunition and
fled with their men from their posts just because they heard that a Chinese
outflanking column was coming their way. No, we don’t want to learn any
decisions from that because we’re perfectly happy to manufacture history.
Everyone from the topmost generals, with the rot seeping down the chain of
command.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Have you read any
regimental histories of the Indian Army? Most of them should be on the fiction
shelf of the library. And an army that institutionally lies to itself, that
tell lies in its citations for gallantry awards as a matter of course… military
culture is dying and needs to be resuscitated.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(g) You say you don’t
know Lt Gen Shankar Ghosh’s shenanigans with his medial category as his star
waxed and waned, but you are certain that he is “one of the finest officers to
have ever served in our Army.” And you have decided that I have attacked Lt Gen
Ravi Dastane, who everyone knew 25 years back was “chief material”.</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">You admit that you don’t
know whether Lt Gen Shankar Ghosh actually fiddled his medical category, but
you’re confident that he’s a fine officer. This can only mean that, in your
books, a fine officer remains a fine officer regardless of how contemptible his
actions are. I don’t think this warrants a comment from me!</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">And how have you
concluded that I attacked Lt Gen Ravi Dastane? Clearly you haven’t read the
article that I wrote. There is not a single word or phrase in that article that
is derogatory to the officer. It is a pure enumeration of facts. So, may I
suggest, please go back and read the piece that you cite so authoritatively.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(e) We cannot condemn
any chief without a “holistic” view of everything he has done during his
tenure. You say that not every chief can be a Sundarji or a Bipin Joshi and
that as long as he“stays out of controversy and leads the Army in a fair,
impartial and professional manner, then he would have done his job.” </span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I’m sorry, but I simply
don’t agree with you. In my course alone, which I think was pretty much an
average course, there were at least five young officers with the potential to
be “a Sundarji or a Bipin Joshi.” I am sure that is the case with most courses.
And if these officers do not realize their potential, we need to ask ourselves
why.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">What a depressing
statement you make: “As long as he stays out of controversy and leads the Army
in a fair, impartial and professional manner, then he would have done his job.”</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Are you saying that this
is all that we should expect from our topmost generals? From the office that
has been occupied by a Cariappa, a Thimayya, a Manekshaw and a Bipin Joshi?</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(f) Gen VK Singh was
not politically ambitious or divisive. He took a courageous stand on the date
of birth issue.</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">While I agree that Gen VK
Singh was airing a legitimate grievance on the date of birth issue (though he
showed extremely poor judgment in accepting in writing at the time of his
promotion to Maj Gen and Lt Gen that he was born in 1950), you are totally
wrong in asserting that he was not politically ambitious or divisive. An army
chief who starts attending the inauguration of statues of political leaders is
using his office as a launch pad for a post-retirement political career (which
is already playing out, in case you haven't noticed!) That is beneath contempt,
as far as I am concerned.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">And he was not divisive?
All I can say is “LoL”. Go out there and talk to someone in army headquarters
right now. VK Singh was divisive; Bikram Singh is divisive. And so will be all
the future chiefs for as long as professional competence is measured, even
partially, by personal loyalty rather than pure military capability.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(g) You say that, since
“Not a single word is ever mentioned by any Indian Minister/ Dignitary/Official
about our Forces,” the country doesn’t deserve “a dedicated, apolitical,
proffessional Army like ours.”</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Do I detect a veiled
threat here? An implication that we should have an army like our western
neighbour, that shows the “babus and dhotwalas” their place?</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">If that is what you are
suggesting, you are doing the army no favour, and India even less so. We have
seen what army rule has achieved in multiple countries. It will be even worse
in India.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: purple; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(h) We have fought more
wars than the South Koreans, and are therefore more “entitled”to a war memorial
than them. </span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I have no problem with
chest beating about the Indian Army. But I do have an issue when it takes the
form of false comparisons with other armies that make them look small. Do you
really feel superior to the South Koreans? Since you're talking about a war
memorial, let me give you a few comparative statistics about our battle
casualties.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The total number of
Indian Army battle casualties in all operations since 1947 --- the 1947-48
J&K operations; the 1962 war; the 1965 war, the 1971 war, Op Pawan (Sri
Lanka), Op Meghdoot (Siachen), Op Vijay (Kargil), and all the LIC operations
that the army has conducted in J&K and the northeast --- is less than 20,000
dead and 37,000 wounded. That is the official count by AG’s Branch, Army
Headquarters.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The South Korean Army had
at least 100,000 to 1,500,000 dead in the Korean War (some estimates go up to
400,000 killed). So it is not a good idea to speak disparagingly of other
armies.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Another figure that will
put our own casualty count in context. On 1<sup>st</sup> July 2016, the first
day of the Battle of Somme --- which was just ONE DAY OF ONE BATTLE in the
four-year-long World War I --- the British Army took more casualties (20,000 dead
and 40,000 wounded) than the Indian Army has taken in the last 66 years.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">This is not to gainsay
the sacrifices that Indian soldiers have made post-independence. Even one
soldier killed is a massive human tragedy in that person’s home. But, as an
army, we need to get some perspective about how great we are. We need to stop
talking for a while and think. All of us are so busy trying to talk up army’s
image that it does not strike us that everyone might not be as impressed with
us as we are with ourselves. And when someone gets up and points out something
wrong, we go into a child-like sulk.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: navy; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">So while I respect your
right to do whatever you like, I will continue to do what I believe is needed
to push the army into fixing things internally. We have excellent junior and
middle-ranking officers that are yearning for quality leadership. But that will
need a radical shift of ethos amongst senior ranks. This is inevitable; if it
doesn’t happen top-down, it will happen bottom-up, with terrible consequences
for the army. Or it will happen outside-in, which might be even worse.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">With warm regards,</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p> </o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Ajai Shukla</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></div>
StraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971909162132256912.post-85118491858437900842012-11-14T20:12:00.003+05:302012-11-14T20:12:46.352+05:30My Response to Ajai Shukla's Article "Wake Up Generals"<div>
See Ajai Shukla's article in the Business Standard at <a href="http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/ajai-shukla-wake-up-generals/491063/" target="_blank">http://www.business-standard.<wbr></wbr>com/india/news/ajai-shukla-<wbr></wbr>wake-up-generals/491063/</a> or in his blog "Broadsword" here <a href="http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2012/10/wake-up-generals.html" target="_blank">http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/<wbr></wbr>2012/10/wake-up-generals.html</a>.<wbr></wbr> Then read my response to that. In my Response, highlighted in <span style="color: red;"><strong>RED</strong></span> are his remarks/phrases. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: large;"> <strong> <span style="color: #cc0000;"><u>My Response to Ajai Shukla's Article "Wake Up Generals"</u></span></strong></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: large;">Dear Ajai,</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: large;">I am a regular reader of<span> </span>your well-researched and well-written articles in your blog “Broadsword”. Most of them are informative and thought provoking, and a good way for a reclusive, introverted retiree like me to keep in touch with current Army issues.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">But your article in the Business Standard <span style="color: red;">“<b>Wake up, generals!”</b></span><b></b><span>was deeply disappointing. I thought it was crass – singularly lacking in taste and loyalty – and, may I add –intellectual honesty. There is a grain of truth in every issue that you touch upon, but the sweeping generalizations, exaggerations and illogical conclusions you’ve drawn on flimsy evidence, do your Army service little credit. You’ve obviously cut your umbilical cord with the Army and sound more like a journalist with a little knowledge about the Army, rather than the other way around.</span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span>Let me elaborate: your outright condemnation of both Gen VK Singh and Gen Bikram Singh in the very beginning imparts a negative tone to your whole article. We cannot condemn any Chief, past or serving, just on one action/set of actions. His performance must be viewed holistically and his overall impact on the Army seen, before pronouncing judgement. I personally don’t think that Gen VK Singh was either <span style="color: red;">‘politically ambitious’</span> or <span style="color: red;">‘divisive’</span>.While I reserve my opinion on what he achieved in his entire tenure, I think it was a courageous stand he took, even though the issue was a redundant one. As far as the current Chief is concerned, I don’t think you are qualified to comment in the definitive manner that you have. <span style="color: red;">"Most new bosses, even sports coaches, are expected to provide a new direction.”</span>Silly comparison and a sillier joke that follows. Sports coaches are invariably changed after a debacle and a new direction may be in order. Army Chiefs, on the other hand, are <b>not</b> <span style="color: red;">‘supposed’</span> to invariably provide a new direction. As if </span><span>the appointment of a new Army Chief is for the express purpose of prompting radical change. It most certainly is not. </span><span>If Bikram stays out of controversy and leads the Army in a fair, impartial and proffessional manner, then he would have done his job. Not everyone can be a Sundarji or a Bipin Joshi.</span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">The next three paragraphs on the supposedly ostentatious life-style of the Chief are a body-blow to the Army, coming as it does from an insider. Most Army officers have high self-esteem and live in style (though dignified) compared to their civilian peers, belying their low pay. The more senior they get, the more perks they are entitled to. And our Officers Messes are a study in decorum and elegance. I really don’t think there is any harm in living in style, as long as it’s done within one’s pay and authorised perks. And the perks are not inordinate, coming as they do at such a late stage in his career. When I was the Commandant, MIRC – the DC of Ahmednagar came to our Mess. He didn’t walk – he strutted. He came with a retinue of two assistants (uninvited), and six armed policemen in four vehicles, two of which were Toyota Corollas. He considered himself every bit my equal, possibly higher in precedence (equating himself with the Commandant of the Armoured Corps Centre – a Lt Gen !!). And I was commissioned in <b>1974</b>and he in <b>1999</b>. The pomp and ostentation that junior IAS/IPS officers live in has to be seen to be believed. Indicting the Chief for living in Army House in the manner befitting any Head of an organisation (in India or abroad) is hitting well below the belt. What do you want him to do – pitch a tent in RD Parade ground ? And entertain top dignitaries from India and around the world there ?</span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">You imperiously comment <span style="color: red;">“This travesty faces no resistance from subordinate generals, many of whom are hardly angels themselves”</span> and then go on to cite several retired officers, not one serving under the current Chief. You castigate Lt Gen Shankar Ghosh for his down and up medical category –I don’t know the exact details, so I can’t comment. But I do know Gen Shankar Ghosh and he is one of the finest officers to have ever served in our Army and your personal attack on him without any personal knowledge, is a travesty of justice. He would have made a fine Chief, had the circumstances so permitted. Ask any officer who has ever had the privilege to serve with him. The current lot of Army Commanders are my peers and I’ve known them for decades and not one of them fits your Satanic description. Each one (including Ravi Dastane, a prospective one, <span> </span>– who you attack in a subsequent article, and who was known 25 years back as “yeh toh Chief material hai” !!) is a thorough proffessional and shuns the Five star culture, especially during visits, when subordinate commanders tend to pile on the pomp. I’m not sure where you’ve got your inputs from – or are you just assuming ? Or general lack of faith in our senior officers ? You mention corruption in your heading, but do not elaborate later – possibly you club it with the perks you say<span style="color: red;">“threatens to seep downwards”</span> to poison the Army.</span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span>Saying that the <span style="color: red;">“recent face-offs…</span></span><span style="color: red;">suggest a decline in the ironclad faith that the army jawan has always had….”</span> is hugely misleading. Such incidents have happened on and off in our Army throughout my service and point to a localized lack of leadership, man-management and compassion, rather than an across-the-board drop in disciplinary standards. And this is true for armies of most Nations in difficult circumstances – throughout history. Reading “Crisis in Command” by Gabriel and Savage is an eye-opener on the lack of man-management and poor leadership of the US Army in Vietnam. Thankfully, our Army is not headed down that perilous path and knowing the calibre of our officers and men – <i>we never will</i>. </span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="color: red;">“Lack of intellectual direction”</span> and <span style="color: red;">“intellectual desert”</span> are phrases that you used in casual disdain. I was a GTO in an SSB and abstract intellectual ability in a candidate was <b><i>not</i></b> a pre-requisite for selection. Agreed; no great intellectuals in our Army. But the amount of intellectual <b><i>activity</i></b> that our Army does is astounding. The equipment oriented and the tactical/command/staff courses we do and examinations we undergo keeps an officer busy throughout his career. An overdose, I sometimes tend to think. From the Young Officers Course to Junior Command to the Staff Course to Senior Command to Higher Command Course/LDMC to National Defence Course, no other institution prepares their officers so thoroughly for their next rank/assignment. I was an undergraduate when I joined the Army. During the course of my career, I progressed to graduation to post-graduation to a Post-Doctoral Scholarship. I have studied every worthwhile military General/campaign and read every eminent military writer – across nations, across history. From Genghis Khan to Sun Tzu to Richard Simpkin, to the two World Wars. I presume nothing has changed since I left three odd years ago. I’m not sure which fabled intellectual desert you allude to. Every Army officer is given the wherewithal to equip himself intellectually and continually improve himself. If he<span> </span>doesn’t use these resources, then he has only himself to blame. Most do (many are forced to), some resolutely don’t – well, there are laggards in every profession. Overall, Service officers are more intellectually enabled than any other profession in India, where “on the job training” or “experience” doubles up as education. <span> </span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: large;">I do not agree, as you seem to suggest, that every officer/soldier should study the 1962 debacle. Senior officers must study it to understand what went wrong and cull lessons and remedial measures from the campaign. But to teach it across the board would be deeply distressing and de-motivating. At any rate, there’s not a lot of factual material on it – till the Henderson-Brookes Report is de-classified, if it ever will be. I’ve read “Himalayan Blunder” by JP Dalvi and “The Untold Story” by BM Kaul and both are not definitive over-arching military studies, merely personal narratives. </span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">All in all, I’m deeply distressed that one of our own on the other side has stopped representing our point of view and has started running us down publicly, using the inside knowledge that he has gained during his time in the Army. <span>You, of all people should realize that the Defence Forces are one of the few institutions which are still <b><i>relatively</i></b> uncorrupt and honourable and it is precisely because of this that the media love a good Army bashing article–<span> </span>it sells. No use writing about dishonest or corrupt politicians or bureaucrats. Just one big yawn. I sincerely wish you had kept this article in-house, in your blog, rather than publishing it in a reputed publication, where the lay </span><span>reader will take your<span> </span>gross misrepresentation of the army at face value…</span><span>but apparently you wrote to sell. </span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="font-size: large;">Today, politicians and bureaucrats are hell-bent on denigrating the Army. We need our Veterans to support the Defence Services, especially those in influential positions in the media. We have a host of unresolved issues – like the OROP, the 6</span><sup><span style="font-size: small;">th</span></sup><span style="font-size: large;"> Pay Commission inequities, the CDS issue et al, but most importantly; restoring pride and honour to the Defence Forces. I’d gone to South Korea, when I was Dy MS with Gen HS Panag – and for a Country that has fought one single war in its <b><i>entire</i></b> history, they have a wonderful, comprehensive War Museum. Isn’t it shameful that we don’t have a single War Memorial/Museum in India ? See the <b><i>izzat</i></b> that the Americans give to their soldiers – in every speech made by Barack or Michelle Obama, they talk about and thank their “men and women in uniform, who sacrifice a lot”. Not a single word is ever mentioned by any Indian Minister/Dignitary/Official about our Forces. We’re invisible –except when Veterans like Ajai Shukla denigrate the Services for no apparent reason. I’m ashamed of my Country for this. It doesn’t deserve a dedicated, apolitical, proffessional Army like ours. Jai Hind…..</span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"></span><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: right; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">Brigadier Ajit Nair (A Veteran – and still proud of our great Army)</span></span></b></div>
</div>
StraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971909162132256912.post-51855782588804011932011-10-20T11:21:00.000+05:302011-10-20T11:21:18.719+05:3030 SEPT 2010 : VIEW ON JAMMU AND KASHMIR<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center; text-indent: 0.5in;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">30 SEPT 2010 : VIEW ON JAMMU AND KASHMIR<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center; text-indent: 0.5in;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">(After Watching “The Big Fight” on NDTV 24X7)<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: center 3.5in left 371.2pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><u>By Brigadier Ajit Nair (Retired)</u><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><u><o:p></o:p></u></span></b></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">The Nation has been keenly watching the ongoing hiatus in the Kashmir Valley. Those who understand the political stakes involved and the vested interests at play, trying to jockey themselves into favourable positions once sanity prevails –are sickened at the unnecessary violence and the loss of life. The vast majority – who don’t understand – fall into two camps. One thinks that Kashmiris are being brutally repressed and the other feels that they are being pampered and wonders what the fuss is all about. Both, of course are far from the truth. </span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">I’d like to put down a fresh perspective on the issue, conceived from studying J & K for decades and my experience of having served there for five separate tenures – over eight years in all.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">A word about myself. I’m a recently retired Army officer from the South. I’m completely apolitical and though a Hindu, have no love lost for fundamentalists – either Hindu or Muslim. I have no hatred for Kashmiris nor any prejudices against them. I’m taking a completely impartial view, though I sometimes may sound somewhat cold or emotionless – which the truth often is. We’re not going to solve the Kashmir issue through emotion – only a rational and logical solution will work.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">First and foremost, we need to make it absolutely clear to the Kashmiri youth that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Independence for J & K <u>IS NOT AN OPTION</u> – Autonomy is.</b> Inexplicably, there seems to be hesitation on the part of the Govt or other players involved<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>in saying this unequivocally. Both India and Pakistan are Federal States with a diverse population. Independence for one State would lead to similar demands from many others, as has happened before and is still happening. Independence for J & K would negate our diversity and raison de etre and would be an unmitigated disaster for both Countries. This must be said often and repeated at every forum, because this is the absolute truth and though the separatists may not like it, even they know it is the reality. Otherwise, the misguided youth of Kashmir seem to think that even though Independence is not an immediately viable option – at least there is a glimmer of hope, something to fight for. There frankly isn’t a hope in hell that India or Pakistan will permit this to ever happen. There is just no use fighting with this Aim in mind and if the aim is unattainable, then the fight is futile.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">If hypothetically, a Plebiscite or better still, an opinion poll is held, chances are that a vote for India will prevail. All minority communities (Hindus, Buddhists, Gujjars and Bakherwals, Shia Muslims and Sikhs) will vote against Pakistan and against an Independence with a majority Sunni Muslim population. Even rational Muslims will see the fragility of the new State surrounded by three large nuclear neighbours. Domination or exploitation by any one of them is a certainty. Only within a democratic India is the safety and prosperity of J & K assured.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">The current violence in the Valley is inexplicable. In recent years, we have seen the conduct of two successful elections, success against terrorists, diminished support for secessionists and revival in tourism. Then what prompted the youth to suddenly become ‘stone pelters’ ? “Spontaneous”, or “by people not leaders” are unconvincing. Such large-scale and sustained agitations need organisation and leadership. In the absence of any provocation by the State, one can only agree with the hypothesis of the Govt that it is externally motivated and possibly controlled. Aided and abetted by the ‘separatists’. The killings (of over 100 Kashmiris) in the last three months or so cannot be the reason, as claimed. That was a fallout of the demonstrations and unprovoked violence against the State and not vice versa. At best, chicken and egg. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Any grievance that the youth had could have amicably been discussed and resolved with their own Kashmiri Muslim Chief Minister, recently elected by them in a 61% turnout election.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">Apologists keep talking about “bullets against stones”. For heaven’s sake, do they expect the Police and Para-military to pick up the pelters stones and throw it back at them? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Certainly not</b>. Violence will beget violence and the Police will use the weapons at their disposal and upgrade their response as the violence continues. And that’s true of any Democracy in the world. India is, by all definitions, a “soft” State (poor intelligence, poorly armed and equipped Police, reactive and slow responses due to chronic indecisiveness, no political consensus even for national issues and constant back-pedaling in the face of political opposition and bickering). But the State response, while not trying to be deliberately repressive, can certainly be ham-handed and ill-thought out – and there <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">will</i></b> be collateral damage. Could this prolonged violent agitation have happened in any Western Democracy ? Would it have been permitted in any illiberal Muslim State – like Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia or Libya ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Certainly not</b>. Or try it in Theocratic Nations like Saudi Arabia or Iran ! Or even in Communist China. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">It would have been crushed</b>. Even in any other State in India, it would have received a much sterner response. Only J & K could have got away with it. </span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">Kashmiris must understand that there is no genuine support whatsoever for Azadi from any quarters. The Lashkar-e-toiba and other Pakistani terrorist groups have their own pan-Islamic agenda and the ISI has its own – any help they may have rendered over the last two decades was incidental and probably retrograde for the Kashmiri cause. World powers (read US) are fed-up of Islamic terrorism and the line between terrorism and “freedom fighters” has blurred considerably. No support, no mediation there. The States of Pakistan and China may help – not through any love of Kashmir, but merely to keep India embroiled and “weak”. But they have their own Islamic worries and vulnerabilities too. Waziristan and Xinzhuang respectively. Can’t get too involved. If I was a separatist or an informed youth of Kashmir, I’d see the writing on the wall. No Independence. Cut my losses and see how I can lead a better life.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>All talk shows have shown that the Kashmiris leadership focuses on the over 100 deaths in 100 odd days. That, I’m afraid is neither here nor there. Admittedly, deaths of innocent young people is sad and deserves our heartfelt sympathy, but to make it a political issue is fishing in troubled waters. In India death is cheap – witness the 100 odd deaths in a week in a train accident and floods in UP and Uttaranchal. The number of Kashmiris dying is not relevant – the manner of their deaths is. Most have died not in surreptitious or suspicious actions, but in a legitimate open manner in Police action to quell dangerous and violent mobs. There can be no prosecution of policemen doing their job at peril to their own life – or are policemen’s lives cheap ? The risk is of the Police refusing to face mobs or running away – as we saw in the Gujjar agitation. An invitation to lawlessness across the Country. Where there has been prima facie malafide intentions or deliberate use of unnecessary force, the demand for an investigation is legitimate. The separatists focus on these deaths tends to divert attention from real issues. What do the agitators want ? What action does the Govt need to take ? Where do we go from here ? Instead all talk is – did the CM visit the hospitals or the victims’ families ? Is there a failure of governance ? Of course not. Probably because nobody in the media knows the right question to ask.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">In a televised show on the recent events in Kashmir, on <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">NDTV 24X7</b>, the cacophony of dissonance was astounding. Only the Anchor – Vikram Chandra seemed to speak any sense – everyone else just stuck to extreme positions and shouted each other down ! The show was “<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The Big Fight</b>” and there certainly was one ! Vikram, who very optimistically wanted a consensus at the end, was forced to admit failure. Very similar to the national discourse on the subject.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">To the Kashmiris, I say, look at the immense positives of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Kashmir</b> and of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">India</b> and of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Kashmir in India</b>. You are one of the most prosperous States in India. You have a rich and fertile land and culture, with unmatched natural beauty. You are a gentle and peace-loving people. You have tremendous potential to grow and prosper even more and achieve the highest per capita level of happiness in India. You must march in sync with a confident and forward looking Country, respected within the comity of Nations. And where does Geelani and his separatists want to take you ? To Pakistan ? Because, as I said, Independence is just not an option. Compare the two Countries and make an informed and rational choice. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I am not saying that Pakistan is a terrible Country – but in a comparison with India, it definitely comes out second best, by a long margin.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">India</b> – like Shashi Tharoor said in a TED lecture – is a country which is 81 percent Hindu and in 2004, a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Roman Catholic</b> woman, head of the UPA Coalition, makes way for a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Sikh</b> Prime Minister to be sworn in by a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Muslim</b> President! And he in turn was succeeded by a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">woman</b> as President with a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Muslim</b> Vice President. An ancient people and culture who have never invaded another Country. But has been invaded and colonized numerous times and absorbed the religion and culture of its invaders, without losing its own. <span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">As Atal Behari Vajpayee said of India, in Chennai, on 13 Sep 2003, “….a country with 4,635 communities, 325 languages and 24 scripts. It is the birthplace of four major religions - Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism and Jainism - not to mention the animistic cults of tribals and is home to Islam, Christianity and Zoroastrianism”. </span>A vibrant Democracy, the largest in the World and unbroken since 1947, where every type of Freedom flourishes. A liberalized economy where opportunities abound. Where the Army obeys the Govt without political interference, and respects and defends the Constitution and where every caste, creed, community and religion is represented in Governance. Some call it anarchic, but it functions well nevertheless. Of course, like any fledgling democracy and developing nation, we have problems galore – but at least the problems are known, and solutions being either deliberated upon, being formulated or implemented, albeit inefficiently (Democracies unlike Autocracies <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">tend</i></b> to be chaotic – preps for CWG vs Beijing Olympics ?!!). And Pakistan – I won’t specifically categorise it, but suffice it to say – mostly the opposite.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: large;">Kashmiris – your future lies in your hands. You can always elect your Govt and your CM, as you have done recently. You don’t want the CRPF in your urban areas ? Or the Army in your rural ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Throw them out</b>. You don’t like the AFSPA ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Repeal it</b>. You don’t like curfews ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Lift it. </b>You want jobs ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Create them</b>. You think the Centre is not responsive enough ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Make them listen</b> to your genuine grievances. Or too interfering ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Tell them to lay off</b> – we Kashmiris can look after ourselves. You want communal and religious harmony ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Harmonise them</b> yourself – and as a start point, call the Pandits back to their homes, from where the terrorists chased them out. Do you think all of this is too hard to accomplish ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Not at all</b>. All you have to do is be forward looking and positive. Forget your turbulent History or at least keep it in cold storage, and for the time being maintain peace and calm. Stop listening to divisive leaders, who are relics of the past and want to foment trouble just to stay relevant. Say “enough is enough” to terrorists and infiltrators from across. Trust your mainstream political leaders like Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti who genuinely want the best for you. Just do these few things and voila! You will be on a fast track to peace, prosperity and well-being which the young of Kashmir have always craved for and never seen. The AFSPA will melt away with the morning mist. The Central Armed Forces will become unemployed and rumble away in their trucks (except for the minimum numbers required to be deployed on the Line of Control – and they will be looking outwards.) You will be free to pursue your dreams and the dreams of your children; <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>that is the legacy you owe them – not of bitterness, hatred and violence. And all of that is in your hands, to be done by your own volition. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Start today</b>.</span></div>StraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971909162132256912.post-58033699094575689312011-10-20T11:16:00.001+05:302011-10-20T11:16:47.163+05:30GAZA IS THE SCANDAL THE WORLD FORGOT<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 14.0pt;">A RESPONSE BY BRIG AJIT NAIR (RETIRED) TO MARY RIDELL’S ARTICLE IN DAILY TELEGRAPH (REPRINTED IN THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS 11 OCT 2011)<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: center;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">“GAZA IS THE SCANDAL THE WORLD FORGOT”<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The tragedy of Abdullah Wahdem’s home is a poignant and sad story. But, putting aside the deep and heartrending emotions the story evokes, can we just look at the issue dispassionately? Why does Wahdem’s Village receive Israeli shelling ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Because the Israelis are retaliating.</b> Why ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Because the Hamas fires rockets randomly at Israeli villages – in this case, at Sderot</b>. Why does the Hamas fire rockets randomly and without provocation <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">? Because they know that Israel WILL retaliate and cause innocent casualties.</b> Then why do they do continue this seemingly senseless shelling against a much more powerful neighbour ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Because they want international outrage. </b>Are they succeeding ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">To some extent, but their own shelling causes equal if not more outrage. </b><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Then, will they stop, to end the suffering to their own people and to try and usher in peace ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Unlikely. </b>Why not ? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Because, if there is peace, they will become IRRELEVANT.<o:p></o:p></b></span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></b>And this is the same story with every quasi-political, militant organisation. They know how to fight, they know how to gain the support of people who are impatient with long-drawn out peace processes. But once they achieve a position of numerical strength or political authority, they haven’t a clue of how to govern or to bring peace or stability. They consist of rabble rousers and religious fundamentalists, whose raison-de-etre is fighting, terrorising<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>and spreading canards to maintain dis-harmony. And they are voted into power by the Abdullah Wahdems – the common people who do not know how to differentiate between a militant group and a political party. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">This is the real tragedy in the Middle East, especially for the Palestinians. <o:p></o:p></b></span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Its easy to blame the Israelis, but spare a thought for their predicament. Surrounded by hostile neighbours, sworn to destroy them – their fight for survival started with their Independence – in 1948. And who were they before they became Israelis ? Jews, persecuted in Europe and survivors of the Holocaust. In their short history, they’ve fought three Wars, faced terrorism, rocket attacks and implacable enmity from all around – except for the Camp David enforced peace accord with Egypt. With the slow but sure rise of the Islamists in Egypt (witness the recent persecution of the Copts (Christians) by the ultra conservative elements, supported by the Army), this Peace Accord too is faltering. It is only the unstinted US support, coupled with their own tenaciousness, which has kept this fragile Country surviving and even thriving in the little oasis they have created in this harsh and desolate land. This is a Country in which every man and woman serves in the Army and the whole country, especially their border kibbutzes remain in a permanent state of readiness for offensive defence (remember Entebbe ?) This is a Country, which has never seen Peace. In this context, Binyamin Netanyahu’s words ring true <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“ If the Arabs put down their weapons, there will be no War, if the Israelis put down their weapons, there will be no Israel”.<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><o:p></o:p></b></span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>While the whole World, especially India, has heartfelt sympathy for the tragic plight of the Palestinians, displaced from their Homeland and refugees in it – the solution cannot be at the cost of the destruction of Israel, which is the preferred option of the Arabs. Whether the 1947 United Nations decision to partition Palestine and settle displaced Jews and create the State of Israel was right or not can be argued ad nauseam, but that’s History and a fail accompli. The fact of the matter is that Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948, a day before the British Mandate was to end and is today, well entrenched. The only Democracy in the region, the most powerful militarily and technologically well ahead of all its neighbours – what Israel wants , it will get (courtesy staunch US support). The Arabs and the Palestinians will be well advised to keep this reality in mind, while formulating a plan for the State of Palestine.</span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>On 24 Sept 2011, i<span lang="EN-AU" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-AU;">n a speech in the UN General Assembly, interrupted by regular applause, the Palestinian President, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Mahmud Abbas</b> vowed that Palestinians were ready to return to peace talks if Israel stopped building settlements. There was loud applause when he held aloft the official request for statehood that he'd presented earlier to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Abbas said <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“ I do not believe that anyone with a shred of conscience can reject our application.”</b> He was right, but of course the US will veto it, once it comes up for a vote. At any rate, this was a bold and positive move and the Israeli PM </span>Binyamin Netanyahu agreed immediately and said that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“lets </b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-AU" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-AU;">stop negotiating about the negotiations. Let's just get on with it. Let's negotiate peace”</span></b><span lang="EN-AU" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-AU;">. The condition that Abbas placed – that of stopping the construction of settlements by Israel, is probably acceptable to them. It suits both men to have peace in the region. There is a new air of hope in the Middle East. Now it only remains for Abbas to make the Hamas see some sense, to convince them that peace could actually suit them too.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-align: justify;"><span lang="EN-AU" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-AU;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">There is too much at stake for the entire world, to lose this golden opportunity to negotiate a peaceful settlement of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">one</i> of the root causes of animosity between Islam and the West. All Countries, including India, who have a stake must pitch in.</b></span></span></div>StraightFromTheShoulderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16679630366293250527noreply@blogger.com0