Quality of Medical Care in the Army

I have been in and out of a number of military medical facilities in my career spanning 29 years. My experience can be summed up as follows:-

1. RMO and super specialists are by and large caring and dedicated.

2. Intermediatry medical system is not so patient freindly.

Before starting with the criticism let me put on record the fact I owe a lot to super-specialists in the Army. But to quote some examples of 2nd type conduct will only be in order.

(a) Recently I caught cold. First I went to an Army doctor, she listened to me (that is right - just listened) and prescribed medicine for five days. When there was no improvement I went to a civilian doctor, he listened, took my temperature, checked my chest and lungs with stethoscope, took my BP and perscribed medicine for three days and I was cured.

(b) Once my daughter was having fever and as is usual for a child, she was scared while the doctor was `listening' to her and us. Instead of putting her at ease the concerned lady doctor gave a lecture (in our presence) on good manners.

(c) At another time I went to a Duty MO with some complaint and he needed my BP reading. Instead of doing it himself, the doctor told me get my BP checked from the Nursing Assistant.

(d) In short. I find that army doctors display strong inhibition about making physical examination of the patient. They tend to be impersonal and standoffish. They display a total lack of concern. The subordinate staff is by and large rough and preemptory with patient because they are not checked by the doctors.

(d) I have also seen relatives of the in-patients (admitted) pushing the stretchers and wheel chairs in army hospitals. I have also seen in-patients being used as runners and orderlies by the doctors (apparently by keeping them in beyound necessary period). I have also seen hospital Ayahs and Class IV being employed in the houses of doctors and so on.

What could be the solution. first and foremost, there should be public notices about Doctor -patient relationship in all medical facilities. Second ther should be a fair mechanism to represent against the misbehaviour by the doctors and para-medic staff. Third there ought to be an efficiency audit by outside agency of doctor and facilities. These steps would go a long way in improving the quality of medical services in the Army and remove one fo the major casues of frustration.

Honour of Soldier

I am deeply concerned with the supercilicious attitude displayed by section of Indian Elite as also by certain newspapers who are normally percieved to be in-with-the-establishment. They show no qualms in using putdowners like `general has been ticked of' while describing some imaginary interaction between a service chief and the minister or `the ministry has ordered' thereby subtly attributing the power to buearucracy for directions given by the cabinet/ ministerial.

Limits were crossed during on-going tussle between the Services and the Government of the day on the issue of serious anomalies with regard to soldier's pay by 6th CPC and subsequent bureaucratic perfidity. Three influential media personalities ran a campaign against the Services in general and Navy and their CNS in particular. Mr Shekhar Gupta of Indian Express, who apparently wanted to secure a Padma Bhushan for himself made serious charges of disobedience against the Service Chiefs and attempted to run the services down for asking for restoration of extant parties unilaterally and illegally altered by a Committee of Secretaries. Second was Mr Vir Sangvi of HT, who had once upon a time advocated secession of J&K from India . Third being Ms Barkha Dutt who developed deep aversion to Navy in general and CNS in particular for standing up the right. Post 26/11 Terror Attack on Mumbai systematic propaganda to divert the focus commenced even while bullets were being fired at Taj –Trident and Nariman House. And as expected it started with Indian Express http://www.indianexpress.com/news/express-editorial-deadly-confusion/392070/ who on 29 November castigated services in general and Navy in particular for creating deadly confusion. True to form the self-same newspaper had nothing to say about role of other organs of government. Similar story was repeated in its special report on crossing the LoC carried by the Indian Express Sunday on 29 March 2009. After opening with mandatory few lines about life of a soldier the story focussed on life and exploits of a guide for terrorists and ended with apportioning the success of operation to local police who claimed to have provideed information.

Ms Arundhati Ghose, a retired Indian Foreign Service Officer wrote a motivated wrticle on the issue of pay anomalies in the Tribune, Chandigarh. This article is apiece with functioning for her ilk – bureaucrats and their friends. They start by totally ignoring the true basis of a problem, then raise irrelevant issues to divert attention and finally end with audacious but totally false attack on the very existence of aggrieved party and if all that fails then go into deep slumber. For her every thing said or done by the services is motivated and every thing against tem is self-explanatory. For example

(a) She starts by totally ignoring the genesis of the problem. The pay anomalies for the military stem from the fact, that despite consist urging of Chiefs, no military person was taken into the Pay Commission. Later when anomalies in pay commission report were sought to be resolved by the government through a committee of secretaries (COS), the Chiefs again asked the government to include representative in the committee. Rather they were given a false assurance that ` the issues raised by the Armed Forces were well understood by them and will be pursued most honestly and diligently by the Def Secy (a member in the CoS), - an assurance which was not kept and Cabinet was led to taking a wrong decision or deliberately took a decision patently against the legitimate interests of the services.

(b) Ms Ghose goes on to tell a plain lie that, `the three Chiefs of Staff led by the Navy Chief sent an unclassified note to their ranks not to implement the decision of the Cabinet by not submitting their pay slips on October 1’. The service chiefs had done their scared and totally legal duty of asking the government for early rectification of serious anomalies in pay and pension of their subordinates to keep the orders pending in the interim, and Ms Ghose faults them for that. Strange! Really strange! The signal they sent to their men was informatory in nature and nowhere has it asked them to not submit pay slips and Ms Ghose is apparently clueless about system of pay disbursment in the military because military men do not submit pay-slips. I see no defiance in this, rather I see grace on part of Chiefs, becasue they have not gone public with the fact that despite being informed by the Services about anomalies in advance (on 30 August 08) the government went ahead and notified the same on 01 Sep 08 and for next 20 days the PM and his cabinet did not find time to address the issue.

(c) She claims that by not accepting unjust salaries the Chiefs and military have gone against constitution. Another lie as will be evident from a plain reading of relevant provisions of the Constitution. Article 52(2) of the Constitution reads: "Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision the supreme command of the Defence Forces of the Union shall be vested in the President and the exercise thereof shall be regulated by law." Apparently military men are not under any obligation to accept unlawful orders of any government.

(d) Most serious charge she made against the military is that, `The storm that has arisen today clearly has its roots in a general, if widespread, contempt of the forces for their civilian masters and counterparts’. She provides no facts to support her case. First and foremost Ms Ghose ought to know that in democracy it is the `people’ who are the Masters and nobody else, least of all the bureaucrat, should arrogate to himself/herself the mastery over the armed forces of the nation which are made up of free citizen who has volunteered to bear arms for the nation. That makes the soldier a part of masters and not slave as Ms Ghose would like to think. So far as her lie that soldiers hold civilians in contempt is concerned, it is indeed apiece with bureaucratic design to launch audacious attack on very existence of military as an honourable profession. She wants us to forget the fact that every soldier has a mother who is/was a civilian, is married to a spouse who is/was civilian, his children are civilians and so is his extended family.

To understand the underlying causes of this animosity we have to travel in past a little. Since 1947 the Armed Forces have been done-in and defanged by successive regimes with very little or nil resistance from senior military leaders. The facts are too well documented and need no repetition. We all know that no one from political or bureaucratic establishment was punished for 1962 Debacle. Even the civil servant involved in Tehlka expose have gone scot free. Hence when the services under the leadership of Admiral Sureesh Mehta stood up for their rights after implementation of unfair 6th CPC award, the politician-bureaucratic nexus was jolted. They wanted to get even with this man who had shown the temerity to stand up for his command. If allowed to have justice he would provide a precedent for other right thinking citizen to demand the same. So they called on the friends in media to pay what Justice Sachar has tellingly described as `Debts to repay’. Likes of Shekhar Gupta, Sangvi, Ms Dutt and Ms Ghose are only repaying a part of their IOUs when they malign the CNS and the Services. Even more serious is the fact that such misreprting, howsoever, demeaning for the concerned service, is never ever refuted by official sources. This silence seem to reinforce the impression created by the media reports in first place.

Since this kind of information is normally attubuted to un-named sources apparently it can be considred intentional and institutionalised attempt to destroy fair reputation of the services and belittle their contribution.

Dying for the Nation - Dying for the Elite

Tweleve terrorists struck at Mumbai on 26 November 2008. It took 60 hours to eliminate them and India lost nearly 200 lives. There was a huge outcry for accountability and strong response. All led by elite of the nation, who gathered in large numbers at Gateway of India to demand that heads roll. The result was resignation by the then Home Minister. Even the policemen who died sitting inside their vehicle were awarded highest gallantry awards.

Now let us cut to March 2009. The CM of J&K is proactively pursuing his agenda to get Armed Forces Special Powwers Act repealed. Many a editor are writing in his support. The ministry is demanding that an enquiry against soldiers accused of `killing the innocent' be wrapped up in three days flat. Afterall J&K is at peace, why should Army be there in first place and even if it is there it should learn to behave in a manner befitting its place (at the bottom). It is at such a juncture that 17 Terrorists infiltrated in Kashmir. They were challanged and eliminated by the Armymen in dense jungles over next 8 days. Sadly Major Sharma and 7 Jawans also laid down their lives.

Was there any outcry from the self same elite for any kind of accountability? Was there any demand for the CM to explain his haste? Was there any demand for the ministry to justify it's illegal fiats. Was there any demand for the Defence Minsiter to explain as to how does he plan to insulate his Army from those who lose no opportunity to belittle and decry the soldier and his contribution. No! The elite has no time for the dead soldiers. The editors are busy perdicting political combinations post-elections. So what is some soldiers die. India has enough poor to fill the ranks of its all volunteer army and the IMA will keep producing idealistic lads to lead their men to certain death so that the Nation can exist to be exploited by the Elite.

A Surreal Experience

NDTV 24x7, an Indian TV News channel ran a programme called `We the People' on from 8 to 9PM on December 2008. The programme was supposedly devoted to outlining India's options in dealing with Terrorism post 26/11 Strike on Mumbai, which cost nearly 200 lives. For me it was surreal experience as I listened to self-serving inanities dished out by people belonging to the Establishment. Watching their attempts to serve self-interest as national interest my thoughts went back into history to the period prior to arrival of British (must have been same when Mughals arrived). The panel was made up two retired bureaucrats (one from Foreign Affairs and other from Intelligence), one Indian in UN employment (who has already voted with his feet) and two very reasonable and sweet sounding Muslim ladies whose views count for nothing in wider Muslim community, one retired Naval guy basically in a comic role and one realist.

By now we all know that Indian Establishment has no stomach for hard choices in so far as dealing with terrorism is concerned. they want to muddle along as best as they can by heaping more and more restrictions and indignities on the Indian citizen in name of security. Since they do not take any proactive steps to nip the evil in bud, country is always reacting to terror strikes. The actions of all players have become totally predictable and pat. There is a terrorist strike. Depending on its location it gets highlighted or sidelined in media. If the strike is in remote parts of India and only involves the poor, then it is more or less ignored. But in case it happens in a urban area, the media is forced to show it. The media first turns into a tamasha (spectacle) and if forced by public outrage the Government sponsored media goes into damage control mode with active support from the front-persons of the Establishment. First the public anger is sought to be diverted from culpability of Establishment by pointing fingers at neighbouring state (which in any case has an ongoing proxy war with India). This diversion succeeds in making people demand action against neighbour. In second step the sponsored media and Establishment start pointing out the difficulties in targeting the neighbour by claiming that the `civil' government of neighbouring state is powerless in hands of its Army and any action would only result in damage to poor `civil' government. This neatly absolves Establishment of any action on one hand and at other hand it puts the onus of sustaining `civil' government on people. Unstated but clearly underlined through this discourse is a message to people of India that the Establishment ahs a duty (which people must understand and support) of keeping Indian Armed Forces under strict control so to not allow India to become like neighbour. Conveniently camouflaged behind this smoke screen are all acts of omission and commission of the Establishment.

The progamme ran true to script. Both the bureaucrats and UN guy extolled the virtue of `inaction' as highest form of action. They wanted us to remember that the poor `civil' government was totally out of control and we were not capable of doing anything to its Army (who were real rulers). Two sweet ladies kept us searching for hankies by constantly reminding us that we must learn to bear our loss without blaming any one (at least not with India and while talking of neighbour we must be civil so to not offend) and the naval guy in comic role provided much needed relief as and when the proceedings became too sweet for even non-diabetics like me. And, the anchor did a commendable job of keeping Realist out of discussion.

Friend I am sure similar arguments must have been made by the Establishment when faced with foreign invaders and their local sympathizers in past. Do not be taken in. because it is all a thin smoke screen to save the Establishment. Let me show it. Let us for the sake of argument accept that neighbouring country truly has a military ruling by proxy. Well what it achieved. first the economic status of a citizen of neighbouring country is not much different from Indian citizen. Second despite being just about 20 percent in size, this neighbor has remained an effective thorn in our side. Third every evil perpetuated by this neighbour has been initiated by so-called `civil government'. Let us not forget that 1948 was fought when civil government was in full control. A pledge to eat grass but make nuclear bomb was taken by Mr Bhutto. Taliban were created and sustained by his daughter. Kashmir terrorism commenced under Mr Nawaz.

It is about time people called the bluff of Indian Establishment and its sponsored media and told them to get or get out. We have to fight back and the strike by us has to be where it hurts. It can be:-
(a) Try and join NATO led operations in Afghanistan to break the back of terrorists sheltering in South Afghanistan.
(b) Introduce National ID Card system.
(c) Go after illegal immigrants effectively.
(d) Establish special courts to hear terror related cases and ensure decision within six months.
(e) Constitute Statutory Citizen Oversight Committees to supervise police functioning so that laws and special powers are not misused.
(f) Demand transparency in raising and maintaining security capabilities so that a minister is not able to take away 20 cars from police or a police officer is not able to employ 10 constables fro domestic chores.
(g) Demand accountability from all organs of state including intelligence.
(h) Withdraw special privileges of politicians and Establishment.

Terror in India

TERROR IN INDIA

Recent terrorist strike on Mumbai has laid bare all that is good as also all which is venal in our country. In normal times it is usual for the good to keep quite in such times, the good depend on common sense of the people to shift chafe from the cheese. However these are not normal times. Our a period of time our country and its systems have been captured by the self-serving, who is past acted like humanists of Albert Camus’s novel The Plague refuse to see evil in form of rats who are attempting to overrun the city and when plague breaks out attempt to shift blame for the crisis on to those who are trying to save India. To advance their selfish agendas these people have no qualms in running down every good man or institution through a deluge of calumny and disinformation.

Two set of people who today seem to be totally smug and satisfied with their performances are the bureaucrats and certain honchos from media. I am sure every one remembers a press conference by a smug looking Special Secretary Internal Security, IMHA, where the gentleman claimed full marks for the crisis management committee consisting of Cabinet Secretary and himself. And, what as their achievement – it was to have dispatched NSG. Do not ask why it took nine hours for the NSG to be effective at target end. Just go by certificate issued by Ms Barkha Dutt to Special Secretary for complimenting the media. Read her in `Don’t shoot the messenger, HT, Chandigarh Edition, 06 Dec 2008, pp 8. I find it a classic example of mutual back-scratching.

Three influential media personalities have been running a campaign against services in general and Navy and their CNS in particular, during recent past. Mr Shekhar Gupta of Indian Express, who has been running the services down for asking for restoration of extant parties unilaterally and illegally altered by a Committee of Secretaries. Second is Mr Vir Sangvi of HT, who had recently advocated secession of J&K from India. Third being Ms Barkha Dutt who has developed aversion to Navy in general and CNS in particular for standing up the right. In case of 26/11 Terror Attack on Mumbai systematic propaganda to divert the focus commenced even while bullets were being fired at Taj –Trident and Nariman House. And as expected it started with Indian Express http://www.indianexpress.com/news/express-editorial-deadly-confusion/392070/ who on 29 November castigated services in general and Navy in particular for creating deadly confusion. True to form the self-same newspaper had nothing to say about role of other organs of government.

To understand the underlying causes of this animosity we have to travel in past a little. Since 1947 the Armed Forces have been done-in and defanged by successive regimes with very little or nil resistance from senior military leaders. The facts are too well documented and need no repetition. We all know that no one from political or bureaucratic establishment was punished for 1962 Debacle. Even the civil servant involved in Tehlka expose have gone scot free. Hence when the services under the leadership of Admiral Sureesh Mehta stood up for their rights after implementation of unfair 6^th CPC award, the politician-bureaucratic nexus was jolted. They wanted to get even with this man who had shown the temerity to stand up for his command. If allowed to have justice he would provide a precedent for other right thinking citizen to demand the same. So they called on the friends in media to pay what Justice Sachar has tellingly described as `Debts to repay’. Likes of Shekhar Gupta, Sangvi and Ms Dutt are only repaying a part of their IOUs when they malign the CNS and services.

The public gaze is being sought to be diverted from flaws of Intelligence Establishment, Central Crisis Management Committee, Customs, Mumbai and Maharashtra Police, and being laid at the door of services in general and Navy in particular. Some pertinent questions which have not being asked, but need to be asked are:-

As documented by Mr Arun Shourie, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/surprised/392625/ both the HM and PM of India have, since 2004 been highlighting the threat of a sea based terror attack on India.

1. 1. What action did the Government and particularly Ministries of Defence and Home take to meet such a threat during last four years?

2. Why a system of National Identity Cards not been implemented so far?

3. As recorded by Ms Dutt, key recommendations of task forces set up after Kargil 1999 have yet not been implemented. Who is responsible for delay? http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/FullcoverageStoryPage.aspx?id=d8afd42f-7ec7-4640-a690-c61d8c168b63Mumbaiunderattack_Special&&Headline=Don%e2%80%99t+shoot+the+messenger

4. Navy has been asking for streamlining port security management. Why have its recommendations been stalled?

5. Why attempts to identify illegal migrants thwarted time and again?

Coming to events of 26/11 itself, certain questions not being asked by media are. Since R&AW and IB claim that they knew exact location of terrorist ship on 19 November.

1. Why did they not know the type, size and registration of the ship?

2. Why did they not track the movement of ship over next few days?

3. Did they share this information with the coastal states and customs?

4. If yes, what steps did the police of coastal states and customs took to thwart projected landing?

5. What action did Central Crisis Management Committee take?

6. As claimed by Special secretary Internal Security, the crisis was handled by him and Cabinet Secretary. Question arises as o where was the NSA during crucial first few hours?

7. Why did it take nine hours for the NSG to reach the site of incident?

8. Sad loss of lives of 14 ATS personnel without any harm to terrorists need to be investigated. How did this well trained and forewarned group fall so easily?

9. Why were the sites of terror strike not cordoned and sanitized by local police?

10. Within an hour of start of terror strike the Chief Secretary, Maharashtra was on phone seeking help from the Army first and then Navy. What assets did the state have to fight such an attack and how were these deployed in the present case?

11. Why was local police or civil administration not able to provide maps and building plans of Taj – Trident, Nariman House and Oberoi?

Coming to role of media in general and MS Dutt in particular, questions which emerge are:-

1. Why did she broadcast room number and location of Ms Sabina and thereby expose her to terrorists who were in touch with their minders on phone.

2. Why did she give live coverage to slithering operations of NSG and there by forewarn terrorists inside Nariman House?

Ms Dutt takes a morally reprehensible position while trying to explain her conduct. She says, `cordon was decided by officials. Had any one asked us to retreat or switch off our cameras, we would have done so’. How childish! Was she a little girl lost in bad big world and needed to be told what was wrong or right?

But wait, some would say, she does admit to media (not herself) making `some unwitting mistakes’. Why can the CNS not overlook these minor aberrations, even if they may have contributed to loss of innocent lives. After all the deaths did serve the purpose of raising TRPs! And finally all she has been thanked by NSG and Special Secretary for excellent job done and after this certificate, the CNS should have kept quite. Right Ms Dutt? Service Chiefs must remain true to tradition of past military leaders who crawled when asked to bend.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the time when past favours are being recalled and payments demanded from TRP/ advertisement hungry and self-obsessed media by their masters. So be ready to be blamed for all that you did or did not do. Present witch hunt of Services reminds me of a story in which a Lion wants to eat a Lamb who is drinking water down stream of the Lion. Lion accuses him of polluting the water, when the Lamb points out that the water is flowing down from Lion to him, the Lion retorts that well in that case his (Lamb’s) father had earlier polluted the water and proceeds to eat it. So services have sinned by demanding justice and have to be put in their place! Period!!

We must know that each man who died while eliminating the terrorists in Taj Hotel and Nariman House was a soldier from Indian Army, he was led by Indian Army Officers in an operation overseen by Maj Gen-in-charge Operations. But the public face of NSG was an IPS. Services belong to a group called Common-men of India. Their ilk also died at CST and Nariman House, unsung. Why? Because they (common-men and soldiers) are duty bound to suffer and sacrifice for Mother India with out asking for any thing in return. Not even a fair and just media coverage. And when it comes to compensation common-men would get nothing andr in case of soldiers it will be less than 40% of what ATS persons would get. But that is how it has always been (remember 6^th CPC and four anomalies) and will always be so long we do not stand up to likes of Dutt/Sangvi/Gupta. Harsh words but need to be said loudly. Thank you.

Civil Military Equations in India

1. Indian press and the politicians routinely blame the bureaucracy for many ills including corruption, sloth and inefficiency. The same press also routinely articulates bureaucratic view of politicians as ignorant and self-serving. Sometime bureaucrat and politician get together to blame press for wrong reporting/misquoting. And, the self-same set by and large calls Indian military a beacon of efficiency and patriotism. Not that sacrifices of our soldiers need any certificates! But when it comes to the same military seeking a fair deal in terms of service including pay and allowances, one sees contours of a different equation emerging. The earlier adversarial positioning vis-à-vis each-other is now shown as what it really was – a fraud . It was our mistake to imagine a drawing room discussion between members of elite, as anything but a system of checks and balances applicable to distribution of spoils within the `family’. Dispossessed of the society including soldiers are not part of the family. Now that the Chowkidar (soldier) has shown the temerity to seek a fair deal, he must be put in his place. He (soldierI is a “whiners”, his Chief is portrayed as imbecile who is being defiant and need to be taught obedience. This disconnect between the elite and people who toil and shed blood for the nation is the reason why we have kept getting defeated at foreign hands for 23 centuries. Do we want this to continue or has the time come to let the elite know the truth and expose fallacy of their position. Choice is ours!!

2. Position of Soldier in a democracy. Soldier in democracy is a citizen first. This stands amply clarified by the Supreme Court of India in more than one judgment. A soldier is first and foremost citizen of democratic, socialist republic of India, and just like any other citizen he has rights and duties which remain with him even after he joins the armed forces of the nation (Bedi PPS, Lt Col, VS, UoI, AIR 1982 SC: 1413: 1983 Cri LJ 647 (SC), : 1982 (2) SLJ 583)[i]. Second the Indian soldier is a volunteer. He willingly takes on himself the noble task of defending the nation unto death. This spirit of self-sacrifice for a higher cause makes him a `special citizen’ and not any less citizen. Curbs on his freedom are not meant to make him a slave. These are solely meant to meet certain operational necessities and in no way curtail his right to due process of law in matters of pay and allowances. This is amply clarified through judgments of various courts including the Supreme Court itself (Rai DSC, Maj Gen v GCM Fort St Goerge, Madras, Madras High Court WP Nos. 3067 and 3068 of 1984 (Order dated 25 April 1984) [ii].

3. Command of Armed Forces Article 52(2) of the Constitution reads: "Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision the supreme command of the Defence Forces of the Union shall be vested in the President and the exercise thereof shall be regulated by law." Due process of law applies as much to government of the day as to the soldier. Soldier is duty bound to obey `legal orders’ of government but has no obligation to suffer indignities and calumny. Soldier is entitled to protection extended to other employees in service matters including fair and just compensation. In fact the Army Act provides special protection to soldier from attachment of his pay for any reason and here we have a situation wherein the Cabinet on the advise of bureaucrats (Committee of Secretaries) has lowered pay and status of soldiers and their pensions without giving any reasons (in administrative matters speaking order is legal necessity) and what does the so-called independent press do! It goes on to blame the Military Leaders calling them defiant and disobedient!! If this is not ignorance, then I am sorry to say that it is travesty of truth.

4. Role of Military Leaders in administration of troops. Soldiers do not form trade unions because the task of negotiating a fair deal with the government is assigned to head of unit/regiment/army. It is a duty enshrined in the motto of Indian Military Academy. I quote it in full for the benefit of ignorant.

“ The safety honour and welfare of your country
come first always and every time.
The honour welfare and comfort of the men
you command come next.
Your own ease comfort and safety
come last always and every time “

5. When Military Chiefs articulating their anguish and opposition on patently illegal downgrading of military officers and reduction in pension of jawans they were performing their legal, nay, sacred duty.

6. Role of press in dealing with a set of people who have legal/ self-imposed vow of silence. There are certain curbs on a soldier’s interaction with media. These are meant to safeguard from premature divulgence of sensitive operational information. Training of military is such that it makes the soldiers intrinsically are shy of publicity. This silence becomes part of their ethos and is reflected in adjectives like `the silent service’, which the Indian Navy uses to describe itself. Most of the soldiers extend these limited restrictions to even matters of routine administrative nature. Hence it is the duty of the media persons reporting on defence matters to be scrupulously fair and sensitive to the ethos of military in reporting matters relating to services and avoid any hint of superciliousness, partiality or impropriety. In the instant case these qualities were conspicuous by their absence. Just demands of the military were termed `whine lists’. The 60 year old Chiefs, who have put in nearly four decades of service to the nation were reportedly `castigated’ by a firm political leadership and `told firmly’ to `behave’. This is nothing but lack of character on part of reporters and absence of editorial control.

7. Role of Government in safeguarding military leaders from slander. Even more worrisome is the absence of sensitivity on part of those in the government. One hand when a TV Channel reported existence of a letter in Army HQ purportedly written by serving senior officer (s), the Press Information Bureau of Government of India was very quick in denying its existence. But when on more than one occasion the press reported about `castigation’ of Chiefs, the same PIB kept totally quiet. At the very least this points to grave insensitivity towards honour and sensibilities of the military on part of government or at worst a well planned strategy to humiliate and down grade entire military.

Future. It was heartening to note that people at large, who are the ultimate repository of sovereignty in a democracy have extended overwhelming support to their brothers and sisters in uniform. They instinctively recoginse the special nature of duties a soldier performs, risks he takes, deprivation he suffers and price he pays in terms of family life and risks to life and limb he bears are for the good of entire nation. Let us all stand up to the self serving elite and expose it for what it really is – a set of self-serving, in-breeding cowardly lot who have no stake in Bharat that is India. Let us build a strong vibrant and confident India whose soldiers

---

[i] Bedi PPS, Lt Col, VS, UoI, AIR 1982 SC: 1413: 1983 Cri LJ 647 (SC), : 1982 (2) SLJ 583

[ii] Rai DSC, Maj Gen v GCM Fort St Goerge, Madras, Madras High Court WP Nos. 3067 and 3068 of 1984 (Order dated 25 April 1984)