https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/defence-strategic-importance-of-rajnath-singh-s-nigeria-visit-1223582.html

Strategic importance of Rajnath Singh’s Nigeria visit

Raksha Mantri Rajnath Singh represented India at the swearing in of newly elected President Bola Ahmed Tunubu of Africa’s most populous country, Nigeria. Significantly, he was accompanied by heads of defence public sector undertakings, implying that the major thrust of the visit was defence exports as part of the country’s Make in India initiative.

Recently, India courted Egypt with military exercises, a visit of the Indian Army Chief and had its president over as the Republic Day chief guest. Rightly, it is expanding its scope of engagement with the West African behemoth, Nigeria, with this very first visit of an Indian defence minister to that country.

It is of a piece with India’s foreign policy thrust of late to enhance ties with Africa, a continent with a future rooted in its wealth of strategic minerals, youthful demographic profile and expanding continental integration. India-Africa summits are evidence.

Post Cold War, India's expanding economy has led to a focused engagement with Africa, with India-Africa summits peppering its outreach. This is in recognition of Africa being consequential to India’s aspirations as a global power, best exemplified by its emphasis on multilateralism. African middle powers in themselves and a future more fully integrated Africa are potential poles in the desired world order.

Mindful of its advantages, India is putting its best foot forward in projecting the defence sector. It has an India-Africa Defence Dialogue in place, the second edition of which was on the side-lines of the Defence Expo in Gandhinagar last year.

Defence exports reaching Rs. 16000 crores owe in part to African militaries opting for Indian technology and armaments that are affordable and, being technologically middle range, are user friendly.

Figuring in choices abroad enables India to meet its ambitions to be Atmanirbhar by expanding investment into defence manufacturing and research and development. Economies of scale result from an export market opening up could potentially entice the profit-oriented private sector into this field.

Military engagements take forward India’s training engagements with African countries, ranging from Lesotho to Uganda. At the Africa-India training exercise at the foreign training node at Aundh this March, 25 African nations participated in conduct of humanitarian operations under the United Nations’ (UN) flag. 

Even so, the perspectives of India and Africa on an aspect of peace and security need to be reconciled. While Africa is prescient in drawing a link between climate change and conflict, India wants that the peace and security agenda of the Security Council is not unduly expanded for addressing this.

Since Africa stands for ‘African solution to African problems’, India could up its support from peacekeeping to also include the ambit of peacemaking and peacebuilding. The three together form the three sides of the peace triangle, implying that a holistic Indian contribution requires India to lend a hand in propping up the two sides other than peacekeeping.

Peacemaking will require Indian special envoys to bolster regional and UN initiatives. For peacebuilding presence India must apportion more monies for the periodic global demands for voluntary contributions of the UN agencies, funds and programs. It could even set up an international aid agency of its own. Its strengths in security sector reform, flowing from its apolitical military, can prove attractive for Africa plagued by military coups. 

As defence minister, Rajnath Singh, cannot but be tuned in to the new scramble for Africa between the US, China and Russia, even as the presence of the United Kingdom and France dissipates. This should suggest to him that as an emergent great power, India cannot but also have a strategic approach to Africa.

Given that its major strategic competitor, China, is fairly ahead in light of its deeper pockets, India needs appraising Africa in relation China’s global scheme which sees Africa at one extractive end of its Belt and Road Initiative. China now has a military base in Africa, at Djibouti, even as it prepares two access routes to African trade via Gwadar and through Myanmar. It now also has the largest Navy.

This is anticipatory pre-emption of India’s prospective closure of the Malacca Straits and intended war-time domination of the Indian Ocean. Preparation for the worst case has a deterrent purpose. This strategic context to India’s African outreach must inform India’s military diplomacy.

Finally, India has been a beacon in Africa so far mostly for its progressive socio-political and economic developmental model. India’s Vishwa-Guru aspiration should feed into its current-day politics that otherwise unwittingly undercut its soft power. Its G20 leadership opportunity must be used optimally as voice of the global South to gain African favour.

 

 

 

https://aliahd66.substack.com/p/nyadeshmubarakho

#NyaDeshMubarakHo!

Dedicated to – Vinesh Phogat

When Prime Minister Narendra Modi unveiled the Simha amidst vedic chants atop the then under-construction new parliament building, I had hazarded that was perhaps the inauguration of the Second Republic.

However, Modi’s performance this Sunday suggests that the new quasi-monarchy and proto-theocratic state will date in history to the dedication to the nation of the new parliament building.

Even so, since it is predictable that the forthcoming Ayodhya temple inauguration will be an even grander event - and infinitely more saffron - declaring Hindu Rashtra could perhaps wait till that event.

For now, any claim to this effect could invite a sedition charge. So, Modi is taking his time getting there. While the last time he had bowed to the Constitution when entering Parliament, this time he prostrated himself before a scepter.  

A road bump

Even as he did so, Modi encountered an unforeseen road bump on the road to Hindutva’s Hindu Rashtra with the wrestlers’ protest at Jantar Mantar, ongoing for a month till this weekend, suddenly acquiring momentum.

Unceremoniously dislodging the wrestlers from Jantar Mantar, the Delhi Police lodged a First Information Report (FIR) against them for rioting for their bid to get to the new parliament building for a Mahila Mahapanchayat. 

The Police have so far not followed up with arresting the Wrestling Federation’s chief, Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, on the two FIRs filed at Supreme Court behest, one of which is on sexual harassment of a minor. 

A hopeful perspective has it that the regime has finally overplayed its hand.

The wrestlers had originally wished to keep ‘politics’ from appropriating their cause. They suspected that if the liberals, feminists and opportunist politicians were to join them, it would be a red rag for Modi, giving him an alibi to look away. In any case, Modi proved oblivious.

With 1000 plus signatories to a condemnatory letter on police action, it appears the wrestlers might not be left to themselves hereon. Women who were turned away from the aborted Mahapanchayat at the gates of the new parliament, will also be on hand.

They’ve been joined by farmers. As the distraught wrestlers proceeded to consign their medals to the Ganga, leaders of the farmer agitation intercepted them. They’ve given the regime five days to make amends.

The wrestlers might yet take to the promised hunger strike. The Police has dismantled the protest site at Jantar Mantar. It has denied them the India Gate premises. There is the Ram Lila Maidan site available, though too reminiscent of the Anna Hazare protest for Modi’s comfort.

The farmers will likely lay siege to Delhi; not out of an intent, but because the Police will barricade Delhi. As with the Shaheen Bagh protest, the Delhi Police bandobast will be so designed that protestors are blamed.

Modi’s dilemma

Where Modi stands on sexual harassment allegations is clear.

If he had any inclination to woo the wrestlers, time sharing of the new parliament’s first day could have been done, with the wrestlers turning out in the first democratic protest outside its gates after Modi was done with his tamasha – over two sessions - inside it. A win-win solution was not to be.

Modi could yet defuse the matter from snowballing by having Brij Bhushan step down, if not arrested. Bhushan, though continuing in the chair, is keeping off his wrestling-related duties.

Modi has been proved flexible before. He rolled back the farm laws in face of an agitation. His histrionic ability can be put to good use.  

The Delhi Police already has its marching orders from the Supreme Court. They could claim that having conducted their investigation – for which they have been holding out from making arrest – they have enough prosecutable evidence.

It is easier for Modi to be rid of Brij Bhushan. The opinion of middle classes which he potentially stands to lose due to an underperforming economy might resonate to the wrestlers’ cause. The Nirbhaya case had brought them to the streets, which proved precursor for the soon-to-follow anti-corruption agitation.

It is also difficult to clamp down on the region engulfing Delhi, if the wrestlers plight catches popular imagination in these parts - as former Governor Satya Pal Malik claims.

However, compared to the votes Modi stands to lose, Brij Bhushan’s is a Rajput support base, that includes Dozer Raaj presider, Ajay Singh Bisht. Already trolls suggest that the western Ganga-belt Jats want to wrest the Federation from the eastern Ganga-belt Rajputs.

In anticipation, Brij Bhushan, has taken care to cover his flanks. He is to hold a gathering of seers at Ayodhya on 5 June.

He threatens to have the assembly upend the enlightened legislation protecting children from sexual predators. A seer has already piped up in support of such watering down of legislation, arguing that it is being used to target his ilk.

Modi can’t be seen as caving in to an agitation on the lines of an Indian version of the Woke and Western MeToo movement. A few months on he is to be the chief guest in Ayodhya for inaugurating the Mandir. More importantly, there is an election coming up same time next year.

An Indian Spring?

A recent perspective has it that anarchy prevails in the country. There are several unconnected zones of dissent bubbling away. The agitation last year at the introduction of the Agnipath scheme shows unemployed youth are restive. Evidently, there is much tinder out there, for which the wrestlers could provide a spark.

It is with reason that pedagogy on civil movements has been excised from the syllabus of political science. Modi’s security minders are wary of Colour Revolutions that have upstaged regimes elsewhere. The Arab Spring led to a coalescing of anti-establishment opinion across the Arab world. Indian security minders have drawn their lessons. The regime invective for George Soros shows as much.

Only if the wrestlers manage to spark off a sentiment in Indian public will Modi remove his patronage of Bhushan. The Intelligence Bureau and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) will be able to communicate to Modi when this stage is reached.

The RSS would not like its champion going under at the cusp of Hindu Rashtra. Though miffed by Modi’s narcissism, it is tolerating it since there is no other warhorse in sight, pretenders mounted on dozers notwithstanding.

Modi’s utility for the RSS is to use his political authority to make change indelible. Threatened in Karnataka, the gains made by the regime so far cannot be allowed to be rolled back merely by the voting public exercising its choice.

Modi has not disappointed. In his Karnataka showing, he has kept his flock together, the Congress managing to poach on the regional party’s dissident voters.

Modi has unambiguously shown what New India stands for. He remains unfazed by liberal notions at odds with beliefs of his regressive client base. Political correctness may require a go-bye. Perception management needs at best a sheaf from the hoax, Mother of Democracy.  As for the mouthing, Beti Padhao-Beti Bachao, Love Jihad can be commandeered, with a little help from Sahil, son of Sarfaraz.

Modi has also to show his grip on power. This has been tested and found loose in the external plane, with both China and Pakistan stealing a march on India, the contrary being but propaganda.

Modi’s forte, from his Gujarat days, is internal intimidation. Remember former state minister, Pandya; late Central Bureau of Investigation judge, Loya; and Indian Police Service officers Bhatt, Sharma and Verma; the ongoing plight of eye-witness in the Sohrabuddin case, Azam Khan; the detention of Father Stan Swamy and his comrades; and the false cases against the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act activists.

He could use the opportunity to crack down on dissent, with a dictatorial flourish. Whereas earlier the weak and vulnerable of the marginalized were scapegoats – Muslims and, more recently, Kukis - lightning appears to have struck closer home this time.

The end justifying the means, furthering Hindutva allows for use of a heavy hand.

He may have to replicate Emergency. Unlike with the Emergency, this would not be subject to a rethink. As it is, what obtains has been characterized as an undeclared Emergency, with India topping the internet downtime charts and investigative and enforcement agencies vectored on opposition.

RSS participation through its proxies in jackboots can be expected. Videos from opposition ruled Rajasthan on training and parading around by civilian paramilitary, including women, are viral.

Black operations can serve to manufacture the enabling public consent to crimes against humanity. For illustration, take for instance, the unexplained deaths by burns in a train in Kerala by a perpetrator from the north, who reportedly had never earlier travelled South; amateurish bombs going off prematurely in Coimbatore and Mangalore, conveniently though for a diplomatic meeting on international terrorism in Bangalore; and the killing of a tailor in Udaipur by two Muslim assailants protesting the anti-Prophet invective of the ruling party spokesperson.

Could Modi’s diplomatic engagements, that can be marketed domestically for his Vishwa Guru profile, persuade Modi to get back from ‘2023 BC’? Incidentally, these include an invited state visit to Washington, DC.

International opinion is bestirring, with the international governing body of wrestling taking a view. However, Modi has Quick-Gun Jaishankar on his side, who can undo the damage on social media and YouTube.

The first hint of the regime intent is the Shanghai Cooperation Organisaton summit going online. This cannot merely be due to China and Pakistan likely staying away.

Modi also would not want an international audience have a closer exposure to domestic discord. The G20 tourism meeting at Srinagar last month that turned out a hit-wicket of sorts, was a wake-up call.

When the farmers say they will ‘do something big’, they cannot be allowed an international spotlight. Recall, the farmer agitation was a year-long. Modi needs to wrap up the matter by when the G20 top guns troop down to Delhi.

The next series of state elections is due end-year. He requires nipping it in the bud this summer, lest it queer the pitch for whats seen as a dress rehearsal for the national elections next year. If Erdogan can, Modi shall.

When the going gets tough…

The wrestlers have provided India an opportunity to cast off the Modi-induced trance. Will their agitation prove a road bump or a road block on the road to Hindu Rashtra?

There are two imponderables: one is if their agitation will take on the proportion of a movement; and, two, if the regime preemptively caves-in or takes it head-on.

Whichever way the cookie crumbles, the coming week evokes the phrase, ‘A week is a long time in politics.’

https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/key-takeaways-from-g20-meet-in-srinagar-1221841.html 

The key take away from the G20 fixture in Srinagar

By Ali Ahmed

Exercising its rights as a host state on the meetings in the run up to the G20 Leaders’ Summit, India settled on Srinagar to host the Third Tourism Working Group meeting, the earlier two being non-controversially held at the Rann of Kutch and Siliguri/Darjeeling respectively.

The criteria of selecting scenic venues apt for showcasing India’s tourism potential makes Srinagar a logical choice. Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) is a major tourist and pilgrimage destination, notwithstanding the security situation.

However, since its long-standing security problem has international connotations, India’s alighting on it as a choice was liable to be taken as politically loaded and elicited a politicised response.

Consequently, as expected, some countries chose to absent themselves, the most prominent one being China.

In the event, though 29 delegations were represented, along with China, absent were G20 member states, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and ‘guest countries’, Oman and Egypt. Indonesia sent an embassy representative.

India’s relations with the latter four countries being cordial, it begs the question if India’s choice – though legal and legitimate – proved good for it or otherwise. Afterall, even Egypt, whose president was guest at this year’s Republic Day parade, skipped the event.

India’s determination to proceed even in the face of a possible terror threat shows that it believed that the benefits of showcasing Srinagar would outweigh any cons.

Implicit in its choice of venue was a reassertion of Indian sovereignty. India was determined not to allow anyone veto its sovereign right or allow itself to be self-deterred from exercising it.

India rightly assessed China would stay away, which China reflexively did, claiming it was against holding such multilateral meetings in a ‘disputed territory’. In this it echoed its ally, Pakistan, which is not a G20 member.

That the argument resonated with more countries than India possibly expected shows that India has been unable to fully persuade even states assumed to be close to India on its case on J&K.

On the security front, Pakistan exploited the opportunity with having its proxy groups conduct damaging terror attacks where the security grid is relatively sparse south of the Pir Panjals. However, closer to the event, hoping to stave off allegations of terrorism, it was careful to target the military and used local groups as fronts. 

In the Valley, that two out-of-Srinagar trips – to Gulmarg and Dachigam sanctuary respectively - were cancelled for the delegates indicates that instability persists, a feature that could not have escaped attention of delegates.

Though India might have wished to present a picture of relative quietude, the abiding impression left on visitors is likely that problems continue in J&K.

India’s extensive security arrangements serve to betray that the seeming normality that results is only superficial.

This implies that India’s completion of integration of J&K through reworking of Article 370 remains a work-in-progress.

India would require working harder or doing things differently. Working harder can only be ‘more of the same’, at most packaged differently. Doing things differently is preferable.

That India ran the risk of holding the G20 meeting in Srinagar shows that India has the best interest of Kashmiris at heart. Kashmir was presented as a tourist destination, with Srinagar all dressed up as a Smart City.

This sense of empathy must be taken to its logical conclusion in heeding the truism that insurgency is best tackled politically.

India is already on course to holding elections to the assembly. If it is wary of the elections being undermined by parties insisting that the elections be for a state assembly and not to a legislature of a Union Territory (UT), it could be more forthright with its statehood promises.

Diplomatically, Pakistan, that has been holding out ever since its umbrage at the Article 370 dilution, would likely use the opportunity to reengage with India.  

Chinese positioning on the issue, largely forged in reference to its relationship with Pakistan, would have to acknowledge the changed facts on ground in Pakistani reconciliation with the change.

Though the Ladakh factor remains consequential in relation to China, it could potentially stand separated from the J&K issue.

Since all the pieces are already in place, including delimitation of constituencies and an internally beset Pakistan, elections can be held over summer.

This is the best way to neutralise reservations expressed by the UN Rapporteur on Minority Issues when he opined that India sought to ‘instrumentalise’ the meeting to present a ‘façade of normality’.

A return to rule by elected representatives in J&K by the time of the G20 Summit in early September would clinch India’s image as the Mother of Democracy.

https://aliahd66.substack.com/p/does-the-brass-still-shine 

Does the Brass still shine?

Answering the question implicit in the title of his piece, ‘Army deciding common dress code for officers just a cosmetic change. Malaise runs deeper,’ army veteran, Lt Gen HS Panag, writes, “At the root of parochialism is the diluted character of officer corps that negatively impacts the appraisal system. The military hierarchy needs a straight spine….”

It's easy to see why General Panag takes this view. Ever the hard task master since his National Defence Academy days as the Academy Cadet Adjutant, Panag highlights whats been a niggling suspicion, seldom pinned down since no veteran really wants to be proven right on this. To him, Loyalty demands preserving the legacy of the military ethic. Perhaps in coming articles he may dwell on how to get to a ‘straight(er) spine’.

Academic preliminaries

Both terms don’t really require defining. Military men know what the two mean instinctively, since these partially made them gravitate to the military in first place. Selection, training and socialisation within the military makes these a prominent feature of their makeup. Even so, for the sake of form (not to mention academic conceit), here’s a definitional exercise.

‘Character’ comprises traits encapsulated in Rudyard Kipling’s ‘If’. These are qualities that, at a lower level, help when in combat; and at a higher level are useful for conduct in war.

Arbitrarily, at the tactical level, the lines that ring true are: ‘If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew; To serve your turn long after they are gone, And so hold on when there is nothing in you. Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’

At the operational level, the line that fits the bill reads: ‘If you can keep your head when all about you Are losing theirs.’ The strategic level could use the quality put by Kipling as, ‘If you can keep your head when all about you Are losing theirs and blaming it on you, If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you….’

Perhaps Kipling had in mind ‘spine’ penning these words: ‘If you can make one heap of all your winnings, And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss.’ Like the backbone that envelops the spine and holds up the skeleton, the spine makes these character traits hang in there, together. If there was no spine, these would all flop down.

‘Dilution’ of character is if the spine is far too supple to hold things up, even if supple enough on occasion to tactfully bend with the wind. ‘Straightening spine’ is to prop up the spine so that it provides a hanger for qualities – taken together and along with those of the team – to do their thing. 

Myths and reality

There is no end to myths and legends surrounding plain-speak in the military, making ‘spine’ perhaps the most appreciated quality of the bouquet ‘character’. This holds true right from the tactical level through the operational to the strategic.

At lower levels, some officers carry the aura of their supersession around, their reputation having it that they spoke up their minds and paid for it. At the last gathering of retirees I attended in my unit a former Second in Command strode the scene, knowing his contribution to unit legend that had him holding forth once in an officiating capacity. He had told off a visiting general throwing his weight around that the current in the canal being rather fast, he was not about to risk Ghataks crossing it without a written order to that effect. He retired in the same rank.    

At the operational level, there is a plethora of standard-setting stories of officers standing up for their command and men under command. General Hanut Singh personifies this trait. A story is of General Satish Sardeshpande taking a stand over delay in emoluments due to soldiers on duty in Sri Lanka.

On an operational matter, Lt Gen Rustom Nanavatty’s under-preparation biography will hopefully illuminate an episode in which he is credited with warding off pressures at the outset of Operation Parakram for attacking from the line of march – as it were - on prepared LC defences.

In 1965, Gen Harbaksh Singh is supposed to have brushed-off a suggestion to pull back to the Beas line, when faced with Pakistan’s attempt at Khem Karan to outflank his offensive stalled at Icchogil. (The story cannot be readily believed since Harbaksh and Chaudhury were peer competitors, so for those in the Harbaksh camp (the martial and non-martial race hangover) to trot out this story makes it more of a myth than a subject of due diligence in military history writing. It is logical that all contingencies figure in discussion, enabling the commander to alight on his course of action.) The story, even if embellished, serves to show the premium put on standing true to convictions.

My favourite one on conviction is of Lt Gen DS Hooda levelling with his command in a demi-official letter to officers on why he ordered trigger-happy soldiers to be arraigned for overstepping rules of engagement when they emptied magazines behind three kids out on a joy ride in a car that sped past their check point. He also convicted the human rights violators in the unforgivable Macchal case. That they were left off by an Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) shows the grain of opinion he was up against. That it is popular is evident from another AFT lately letting off Captain Bhoopendra Singh for a similar outrage at Amshipora.

Hooda had to contend with backlash such as a publication in the Army think tank - by a Hindutva purveyor and former head of that think tank - carrying the canard that his actions were politically instigated. Thus, even moral courage that Hooda demonstrated was sought to be dismissed as falling in line to political dictation of the current-day right wing regime – thereby, appropriating the credit for human rights protections due the military for a regime otherwise well known for stealing the military’s thunder for its domestic political purposes. Hooda passes the test worded by Kipling, thus: ‘If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken; Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools.’

In another instance, a general commanding in Kashmir once had no-less than his Chief of Staff complain to the Governor that he had a communal bias, supposedly evident from his insistence on mitigating the human effects of largescale crackdowns, by, for instance, provisioning milk for children caught up in them. In the event, the Governor records in his biography throwing out the calumny. But the incident serves to show that standing tall is harder when stabbed in the back, but to do so - nevertheless - is to take standards up another notch.

At the strategic level, there is the case of case of Sam Bahadur determining the timing of the liberation of East Pakistan. While the story in its popular retelling – not implausibly spiced up by Manekshaw himself – has it that he persuaded Indira Gandhi on the inadvisability of an invasion early in the crisis, a later version – put out by a retired diplomat - has it that Mrs. Gandhi was already so persuaded and only used Manekshaw’s opinion to turn around her cabinet colleagues wanting an early showdown. A recent movie shows the preliminary steps towards the war being taken by the intelligence minders in their engineering a hijack of an Indian plane in order to use the incident to isolate East Pakistan. Recall, that was prior to Pakistan lashing out in racist-tinged panic, thereby falling into the hands of Indian intelligence.  

However, stories of when standards were not upheld at this level are legion, serving to underline the value attached to plainspoken leadership at the higher levels. One such is how the army was pushed into the Golden Temple operation. Incidentally, Gen K Sundarji resurfaces in the very next episode, where again the standards of plain speak were supposedly not upheld when the army set off on its Sri Lanka (mis)adventure.

Unfortunately, the readiness to acknowledge a shortcoming – a plus-point of the military – has in both these cases – just as later in Pulwama and Ladakh - led to the intelligence fraternity being let-off scot-free for its ineptitude in providing early warning - and its cover-up thereafter by riding the broad shoulders of the military. Given the extant intelligence, General Sundarji cannot be wholly faulted in either instance. He could perhaps have insisted on first ascertaining the intelligence picture that had so besotted the political leadership.

The malady continues. Only one official was scapegoated by name in the Kargil Committee Report, a lowly brigadier – who, in the event, rightly mounted a spirited rejoinder. More recently, retired General Naravane lauded intelligence inputs, more or less exonerating them for the surprise at Ladakh.

Dilly-dallying over the war inventory after the 26/11 provocation and, more recently, the non-response in Ladakh (recall a provincial politico back in 2008 going hoarse on the pusillanimity of the Central government) and wanton infliction of Agnipath, are other instances of the Spine falling short.

In the aftermath of 26/11, General Deepak Kapoor is rumoured to have fished out a list of equipment deficiencies to bring home to the political leadership that it would be a political call to send the military to a war in which deficiencies could end up proving consequential to the result. His successor Chief leaked a letter to the government he was at odds with on his Date of Birth, dilating on continuing deficiencies in anticipation of yet another 26/11, providing himself a loophole to use in the event. Neither seem impressed with General Ved Malik’s stoicism, ‘We will fight with what we have.’

Closer in time, there is no public record if the command hierarchy chafed at the bit when Ladakh unfolded. General Rawat’s recently-released biography, which if a hagiography after the fashion these days might not put much light on this. It’s not impossible that they might have remonstrated for a more robust response. Whats certain is that none of them resigned on being disappointed by the political decision. Is it that all were persuaded over the past two decades by the Chinese-built smoke-screen on Comprehensive National Power?

Then there is the mother of all cave-ins, Agnipath. Did Naravane’s standing up against the scheme cost him the Chief of Defence appointment? Even regime-favourite General Rawat was sceptic. If so, did the former Military Adviser’s backing of the scheme fetch him a restart in a higher rank back in uniform? Cynicism arises from the question why the military was chosen as site of this experiment in first place. The scheme appears better suited to the equally-large central police forces. Is it that the political masters knew there would be little push-back, aware the military’s spine had withered under preceding blows from Rafale, Pulwama, Balakot, Operation Swift Retort and Ladakh?

How dire is it?

Evidence on the matter of a Character gone to seed and a rusting of the Spine can only be anecdotal. It’s been similarly noted in the civil services. It has long been so for the police. The intelligence has yet another problem at hand – ideological subversion. Surveys cannot be relied on in India – not after the number of study findings on the significance of Mann ki Baat.

The evidence here is of two officers who I consistently regarded as the best respectively in the two officer batches I was part of (Yes, I made brigadier well before I got to be colonel!) who were felled at the penultimate rank. This shows the elimination of both from tenanting command at the operational and strategic levels owed to a collegium of army commanders feeling that their elevation would threaten the structure and current-day norms from within. Not only was their supersession reflective of fallen standards but to facilitate the fall by those themselves earlier selected against falling standards. Did they pose a threat to the comfort zone of those already inside the departing carriage?

By no means are those selected instead, incompetent. I witnessed at first-hand, one of them leaning out of a balcony at a remote UN headquarters barking out orders to the Uruguayan protection detail as rebels waded in shooting up the town, while his boss from a Western army hid under the table inside. I am however not so sure that the averages have not been driven down by the best not making it.

General Panag informs of the stranglehold the Infantry and Artillery have acquired over those rising to higher ranks. An Engineer General’s elevation as Chief for the very first time does not mean the of Mandalisation has been laid to rest. Panag is clear that a change in uniform for the brass is only cosmetic.

While meritocracy must be the defining feature of higher military leadership, what constitutes merit at that level is consequential. An ability to re-site the Light Machine Gun - which is all Infantry hands get better at - is not quite it. Perhaps, they are also better at throwing a cordon round a Kashmiri village, but that’s not it either. Indeed, that ability perhaps accounts for India’s no-show in a localised conventional war opportunity against China.

The brass needs Brasso

At higher levels, military leadership is not of technical capacity or tactical capability or even operational acumen, though these are required to get to the door. What should open up doors is moral strength. This includes moral virtue; meaning, while abstinence is not essential, a roving eye must disqualify. However, it’s also much beyond virtue and piety. It embodies moral rectitude.

While no doubt the definition is encompassed in the Bhagwat Gita, reciting Kipling here is not a colonial hangover: ‘If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue, Or walk with Kings—nor lose the common touch.’ ‘Virtue’ appears to be the ‘common touch’. What the military teaches as the officer grows in service cannot but be based on the bedrock of what the mother imparts in the first five years. It’s not a case of nature vs. nurture as much of nature and nurture that make for a military leader.

Though unreliable, sometimes WhatsApp forwards illuminate. Take the one on Arun Khetarpal. It has him marching up course-mates to the authorities for plying juniors with drinks. When Arun couldn’t mend them, through example and exhortation, he took the ultimate recourse – which in the normal perspective is a strict ‘No Go’ area. This ability to know what is right and to do right is moral rectitude.

The major expectation of those tenanting higher ranks is the ability to stand true to strategic rationality and military good sense. Those with over-supple spines are liable to sell the family silver, not only of the military, but the nation. They have an advisory role in the corridors of power. They would be unable to play their part if flexibility is all there is to them – which is how the hind of those sitting on upper branches appears from down below.

The coming test

The system is already designed to co-opt them, to ensure their advisory input does not rock the boat. Such daunting circumstance prevails now, when the prime minister and his national security adviser have an oversized image and the ‘deep state’ – the subverted portion of the security edifice - is let loose to run the show. Through a doctrine of ‘deep selection’ – or ‘ease of doing business with’ - they have given themselves military advisers to echo the regime’s certitudes. The threat is under the circumstance of a deteriorated military ethic, the military brass just might.

If the military leadership takes cue, it can only do so at a price in national security and martial reputation. The threat is accentuated at both the nature and nurture ends, with nature falling to social entropy and nurture to military ossification. This would be insurmountable in the normal course, leave alone in a circumstance of deliberate sabotage of the military for ideological ends. To save itself, it’s not for the military to save the nation. Instead, to save its military, the nation must first save itself.