Ever since the announcement by the Modi government of VCOAS Lt Gen Bipin Rawat as the new army chief, GOC-in-C Southern Command, Lt Gen PM Hariz, had intimated his colleagues, friends and relatives that he’d bypass the precedent established by Lt Gen SK Sinha in 1983 (when he was superceded Gen Arun Vaidya) of not serving under his junior in service and serve out the rest of his term under Rawat. Praveen Bakshi meanwhile dithered with his decision to stay but ultimately decided against challenging Rawat’s elevation because, as reports suggest, he expects to be accommodated, ideally as the first Chief of Defence Staff, failing which as an ambassador somewhere or as governor. Hariz apparently has no such expectation but, presumably, will accept such post if offered.
The government may thus be incentivising military officers in the running who don’t make it to the top to not create trouble and get rewarded with high posts elsewhere in the system. This will legitimate, in effect, the actions of the government in rejecting the seniority principle and selecting an officer as Service chief for any reason whatsoever that it deems fit. It is hoped that hereafter “merit” (however defined) will count, not the accident of dates of birth or of entry into service. The next time, the government will, hopefully, be even more flexible and choose from among the entire lot of lieutenant generals. Once the notion of selection is entrenched, the military may end up having younger, intellectually more open, and physically more vigorous officers as COAS, CAS, and CNS.
Security Wise 
Once this notion is entrenched – it is also likely lead to more a compliant and accommodating military whose voice is silenced in civil military relations. Civilian ‘right’ to differ and exercise its prerogative must also be accompanied with holding chosen appointees accountable for their actions/inactions
So far by and large, the Armed Forces were not being tinkered with and this was perhaps due to the lesson learnt by the Political establishment after Nehru – Krishna Menon actively promoted Kaul and created discontent amongst the top military brass including Thimayya. The ignominy that India had to face in having a Corps Commander who left his HQ in Tezpur and reported sick in the midst of battle to Army Hospital in Delhi perhaps taught a lesson to the Political leadership of not tinkering with the Armed Forces.
The entire logic of adhering to the seniority principle stems from the fact that an Army Commander (i.e. a GOC-in-C) has already gone through five selection boards to reach that rank and it is because of this that no ACR (Annual Confidential Report) is generated on an officer who reaches this rank. All officers who reach this rank are undoubtedly very very meritorius and though there may be some minor differences amongst them in terms of capability in some specific aspects of ‘Generalship’ it is better to adhere to the ‘Seniority’ principle in order to avoid a race amongst the top GOC-in-C’s to prostrate themselves before the political (and by extension even the bureaucratic) masters in order to get promoted / selected.
The Political leadership has undoubtedly demotivated and politicised the bureaucracy but should not do that to the Armed Forces – to avoid another Kaul becoming the COAS (or equivalent) with VERY SERIOUS ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES FOR THE NATION.
LEAVE THE ARMED FORCES TO THEIR TRADITIONS.
WHAT EXPERTISE DOES THE POLITICAL AND BUREAUCRATIC LEADERSHIP HAVE IN MATTERS MILITARY?
It would be best if Governorships and Ambassadorships are awarded to meritorious civil and military personnel only say TWO or more years AFTER THEY HAVE DEMITTED OFFICE.
Col. Manjeet@ — a most excellent idea that should be applicable especially to retired civil servants who hog most such posts.
A professional army shouldn’t go by dates of birth. Patton (1909) served under Eisenhower (1915). Difference of 6 years.
@KP: +1.
What does all this mean for India? The easing of US-Russia ties can work in Indian interests provided we give up the tunnel vision – as if our entire universe devolves upon China and Pakistan. Any cooperation between US and Russia to stabilize Afghanistan is something that will strengthen regional security and stability. Thus, it is important not to view the Russian-Pakistani thaw in zero sum terms. Russia can never form an alliance with Pakistan. Period. This is one thing.http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/
India should evolve beyond China and Pakistan. P3 : America, Russia and India
Perhaps, Modi should have taken the advice from his RSS back channels in the Indian Diaspora, and met Trump during his last visit to the US in September instead of being guided by the famous ‘America hands’ in our foreign-policy establishment, who were hundred percent sure of Hillary Clinton’s victory, and wouldn’t countenance our PM treading on her sensitivities by scheduling a meeting with her arch enemy whom she was about to vanquish from the face of America. Oh, what an unpardonable error of judgment! Some heads must roll.
Posted in Diplomacy, Politics.
Tagged with India-Russia, US-India.
No comments »
By M K Bhadrakumar – January 1, 2017
Karnad sir get the last laugh!
Reblogged this on securityanalystblog.