Outreach to veterans, who deserve a fair deal

It is somewhat reassuring that after a rather long hiatus, the top defence hierarchy is making some feeble attempts to reach out to veterans. It appears that ‘angst’, which has been so palpable, is being taken note of, albeit belatedly. It was even more heartening that Tricity was included in this itinerary. Outreach focused on two major issues — welfare and transformation.

It bears reiteration that policy makers feel that thinking can only happen in Lutyens Delhi. In the current age of ‘info-warfare’ and narratives, hierarchy seems to have lost the first round and correctives are overdue. The approach has to be proactive and start at policy formulation stage and not merely as reactive, fire-fighting action. The reach-out needs to be amplified.

Catalytic factors for dissatisfaction

The macro driver of ‘angst’ is the dominant feeling that inverted Orwellian template is being applied, wherein perks and benefits of all (bureaucrats and police) are nonnegotiable but the uniformed community has to struggle to get even their justified benefits. The argument of resource crunch seems specious as mega splurge is being seen in announcements of sops (also referred to as ‘revadis’) before elections. It is also fairly evident that there is not even a hint of cut-back on perks of others.

To rub it in, lots of boasts are made that soldiers are being given everything that they want. There is even talk of veterans having an ‘entitlement syndrome’. On balance, there is appreciation for OROP even if arrears have been released after judicial nudge. Veterans, world over, are treated as a privileged community. Can we afford to be laggards on this score and get away with just some slick communication?

We have a large armed forces and consequently considerable ex-serviceperson (ESP) population, time to rationalise this terminology, when others are being tinkered with. There is logic in need to reduce revenue expenditure but it cannot precede modernization and has to be done gradually. The seminal truth is that armed forces have been rated as the most trustworthy by our populace over the years. This reputation has been earned because Indian soldiers, despite negative equipment asymmetry and frequent intelligence failures, have repeatedly prevailed due to sheer grit and determination combined with ‘jugaad’. Modernization is a costly and tedious process, entailing heavy expenditure and gestation. In the interim, our saving grace is the human capital. Repeated harping on armed forces being the only element being given pension is certainly avoidable, as it is part of national obligation.

Welfare and HR

Cut back on disability benefits and clever twist in terminology by calling it impairment is somewhat below the tax avoidance, below the belt manoeuvre. It is time an empowered commission headed by retired Supreme Court judge, assi sted by domain experts, is set up to review the subject. It will be important to do a time bound exercise and index it on global norms/standards, as also compare benefits being accorded to civilian cadres. Concurrently, medical norms for promotion need to be further liberalized to accept certain categories of impairment in career progression.

Similar approach is required for resolving the festering issue of non-functional upgrade, wherein judiciary is allowing the government to drag the matter by filibustering, in ‘tareek pe tareek’ mode. While on the issue of judicial intervention, it is time that the judiciary allows Forces to run women entry scheme. While initial nudging and even pushing was acceptable, yet the judiciary now needs to grant flexibility and due latitude, as they not only have the major stake but accountability rests with them.

Another contemporary issue is of Agniveers, which got considerable negative publicity after reported suicide case. While opposing the scheme, veterans had stated that the only environment where it can be made to succeed is the Army. Stung by criticism, the government had assured review of the scheme, after fair trial. We await objective and honest feedback as it has long term implications, in remaining invested in our battle winning factor, human capital. In a country, where we have statutory commissions on multiple issues and even animal protection, it is time that the much-promised autonomous Veterans Commission is institutionalized.

Transformation & Modernization

The second issue under deliberation has been about much awaited operational reforms. Finally, there is some traction on formulation of national security strategy. It is hoped that exercise will not only bear early fruition but relevant portions will be promulgated, in the open domain. National security now requires ‘whole of nation’ approach and it mandates inclusive involvement, feedback and objective consultations, with genuine domain experts. The exercise needs to be done periodically, after specified periodicity, like other advanced countries.

It bears reiteration that in 2015, the dominant operational theme was that with hybrid wars, conventional ones are redundant. There was a slow down in mountain strike Corps and focus was on Pak engineered proxy-war. After Chinese action and the unending Ukrainian conflict, we have been forced to not only renew our commitment to mountain strike Corps but also reassign another one from the West to the Northern Front, to cope up with aggressive China. Flexibility should remain the cornerstone of such a strategy.

There is also talk of renewed consultation on theatre commands. Having indulged in this exercise for the last 25 years, it is time to start with one acceptable model, which can be reviewed and improved. In striving for the elusive consensus, we have lost valuable time. It is equally important to operationalize our defence procurement policy as the current mode of emergency procurement is a sub-optimal solution.

END OF ARTICLE