The Army India’s Brhamastra

[Deletedid1]

The army’s recent decision to be selective in acceding to requests for deployment by state governments for various tasks has set off a fierce debate in security establishment both in the North and the South block. One section in the government feels the army cannot and should not decide what tasks it wants to do. "The army is an instrument of the state and therefore the decision to call in the army should rest with the government," goes the refrain among the bureaucrats. Fair enough, says the army leadership. We are certainly ever present to help out in mammoth natural calamities like a tsunami or a cloud burst tragedy in Leh or even a big accident but then don’t call us for trivial tasks like putting off fires in car showrooms or rescuing every child that falls into a bore well, or rescuing people from the rubble of a collapsed chimney," says a senior army officer. Again, an argument that cannot be faulted. So where should the line be drawn?


Before coming to a conclusion, however, it is important to understand why the Defence ministry has decided to back the army’s stand in saying no to ‘trivial’ requests. For the past half a decade, the army noticed an increasing trend among state governments to requisition troops at the first possible chance, tying down army units for months on end in doing jobs that should otherwise have been done by state agencies. An analysis of army deployment in operations other than counter-insurgency and law and order situations showed an alarming tendency on the part of state governments to fall back on the army as a first option rather than as a last resort.


This, the directorate general of military operations felt was diluting the effectiveness of the troops. "Instead of trying all available resources at their disposal, state governments have been found to jump up the ladder and call in the army at the drop of a hat. This we thought needed to be stopped," said a senior officer at the Army HQ. In this context, two recent instances immediately come to mind, one closer to Delhi and the other in the North-east.

The Rajasthan government, rattled by the Gujjar agitation demanding reservation in government jobs, wanted to deploy the army to break the strike without even negotiating with the striking Gujjars, using the state police force or the central police organisations available at its disposal. The MoD, at the army’s insistence simply refused to meet the request for a simple reason, it is not the Army’s job to maintain law and order.


The second instance was the request from Assam and Meghalaya governments to deploy the army during the ethnic clash between two groups on their borders. After resisting the demand to the last possible moment, the army was briefly deployed but was immediately withdrawn. Fortunately, the defence ministry led by AK Antony has backed the army’s stand fully. It has let the state governments know that all future requests for army deployment will be screened at the ministry level which in turn will consult the army before taking the correct decision. It is not as if the army wants to remain aloof from assisting the nation in the hour of crisis. The army’s sterling record in the past 60 years is a testimony to its contribution in the making of modern India. From Tangdhar to Machhilipattnam and from Bhuj to Tawang, the army has come to the aid of the people across India during times of crisis.

Hundreds of such stories abound in the Indian army’s journey in both war and peace since Independence. From disaster relief in floods, tsunami, and earthquakes to rescuing an infant Prince from a deep tube well and from quelling rioters in communal strife to being the last resort in internal counter-insurgency operations, the Indian army is omnipresent. It is, what I call, India’s Brahmaastra (an ultimate weapon). The versatility, adaptability, selfless attitude and resourcefulness of the Indian army has allowed it to be what it is today: Nation Builders.


And viewed in the context of India’s immediate and extended neighbourhood, the Indian army’s stellar role stands out in stark contrast to its counterparts in other countries. Remember, Indian and Pakistani armies originated from the same source, the British army, and yet, six decades since they parted ways, there couldn’t be a bigger dissimilarity in the way the two have evolved. As they say, India has an army while the Pakistani army has a nation! Despite India’s increasing dependence on the army to pull its chestnuts out of fire time and again, the Indian army has scrupulously remained apolitical.

The contribution of the Indian army in nurturing and strengthening democracy—with all its faults—can never be underestimated. It has put down fissiparous and secessionist forces within India with great cost to itself over these 60 years. It has protected India from within and without. The Indian army also has a unique distinction of helping create a nation (Bangladesh) in the neighbourhood and then quietly walking away to let the people take charge. By contrast, the Pakistani army has never really allowed democracy to flourish in its country. Instead, it has created a military-industrial complex that has spread its tentacles in every aspect of governance. Even today, the Pakistani army does not let go of any opportunity to undercut democracy; it nurtures and treats jihadi elements as its strategic asset against India and the United States. 

Even in other smaller nations around India—Nepal, Myanmar and Bangladesh, for instance—the armed forces have had to intervene and run the affairs of those countries at some point. [b][color=red]So who or what makes the Indian army so distinct? Simply put its leaders and its men and their ethos of "service before self[/color][/b]." From the early days of independence, Indian military leaders—stalwarts like KM Cariappa, Rajendra Singhji, KS Thimayya and later Sam Maneckshaw—led the forces from the front and provided a strong moral centre that has remained more or less intact, some very regrettable instances of moral and monetary corruption notwithstanding. For every crisis that the country has faced, military and non-military, the Indian army, has risen splendidly to the occasion. And therefore it is essential that this precious resource is not wasted in tasks that can be handled by agencies—the police, civil defence, fire brigade, disaster relief teams and para-military forces for example. If the army is kept free from the smaller tasks, it will be ready for the big challenge. A nation’s military provides what is called a ‘hard-edged’ backup to its international standing. A strong military and especially a powerful, well-trained, fully-equipped army act as a deterrent against adversaries. It is therefore essential that the nation’s decision-makers consciously back the army and provide it with the support that it needs to meet diverse challenges that exist and are likely to come up in the coming decade.


So far, the Indian army has fulfilled its role in nation building admirably well. All of us, ordinary citizens, politicians, bureaucrats, must continue to back the nation’s strongest asset and further strengthen it, if we desire to see India as a global player in the decades to come.

By Nitin A. Gokhale NDTV’s Defence & Strategic Affairs Editor