ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

Crisis in the defence services

Anger, loss of morale and resentment

Amberish K Diwanji

As you sow, so you reap.

This aphorism must haunt Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat today as one of his subordinates challenges him in a high court. For many moons ago, September 1990 to be more precise, then rear admiral Bhagwat had filed a case against his seniors in the Bombay high court. And it was not just against an admiral or two, but a bunch of them: then Chief of Naval Staff Admiral J G Nadkarni, a slew of vice and rear admirals, the then defence secretary and the prime, defence, and home ministers.

Not only did Bhagwat challenge his non-promotion from rear admiral to vice-admiral but also made a series of allegations against his superiors in the 400-page writ petition, including charging them with corruption in the HDW submarine deal. Yet, after he got his promotion, all the charges were dropped.

Today, Vice-Admiral Harinder Singh, fortress commander Andaman Islands, has challenged his non-appointment as principal staff officer. Admiral Bhagwat, in turn, filed a writ petition against Vice-Admiral Harinder Singh, Union Defence Secretary Ajit Kumar and Joint Secretary R P Bagai. Admiral Bhagwat's plea was dismissed. Vice-Admiral Harinder Singh's petition is still pending in court.

Dissatisfaction is not just the navy's prerogative, it is very much present in the army and the air force too.

In the army, when Lieutenant General H R S Kalkat was appointed General Officer Commanding, Eastern Command, Lt Gen R S Kadyan claimed in the Delhi high court that he had been wrongly superseded. The Delhi high court appointed Kadyan in Kalkat's place; the Supreme Court later upheld the appointment.

Similarly, there is the case of Air Vice-Marshal P K Ghosh, who has challenged the appointment of AVM S Raghavan over him. The court ruled in Ghosh's favour, but the ministry did not implement the court's decision. Currently, the defence secretary faces a case of criminal contempt of court!

Worse was last year, when the air force nearly saw a mutiny after air engineers objected to the disparity in pay between themselves and fighter pilots. The air engineers's wives held spontaneous rallies against Air Chief Marshal S K Sareen. The discontent is so deep that an air force team is holding inquiries among the engineers to assess their feelings.

Said an army brigadier, "One can always understand the need for some difference between the salaries of pilots and engineers, but after the new scales, the difference was very wide. It is also dangerous because unhappy engineers put pilots in the air at risk if the aircraft is not maintained at its peak. I think any wide disparity will breed resentment, which in turn can only affect the morale."

The government has been conspicuous by its absence in the various cases (it refused to intervene in the air force demonstrations) and is on the defensive, especially in the Bhagwat case. The Cabinet appointments committee had asked Admiral Bhagwat to appoint Vice-Admiral Harinder Singh as deputy chief of naval staff (operations), but the naval chief refused to do so. Admiral Bhagwat said as per the Navy Act 1957 all appointments are to be made on his recommendations.

"One reason for the spate of cases is that many such cases have been won by the petitioners and this gives hope to others who have a grouse. So instead of appealing to the authorities within the services, they prefer going to court," said a retired senior naval official who did not wish to be named.

The spate of complaints gives the impression that the current system for junior officers to lodge their complaints is not appealing enough. If any officer has a complaint, he can make a representation to his superior. If he is not satisfied with the superior's decision, he can appeal higher up, and so on up to the service headquarters (army, navy or air force). If he is still not satisfied, he can appeal to the government.

"It is here that there is a lacuna," said the former naval officer, "because the representation is made to the government by the particular service headquarter, giving the case a bias for the HQ's decision. Hence, most often, the government abides by the HQ's order."

A former senior army officer feels the way out is by setting up a tribunal to look into any representation made to the service HQ. "A tribunal comprising retired senior officers, judges, and perhaps bureaucrats can hear the arguments from both the sides and then adjudicate the matter. This will give the impression of fairness and justice to all concerned."

The naval officer too agreed with the suggestion and said the various services have already mooted the idea but which remains in limbo. He also felt there needed to be a more transparent system of promotion and transfers so that all the officers and servicemen are satisfied with the decisions made.

"A suggestion was made some years ago to issue a set of guidelines regarding promotions but it was turned down by the services HQs who feared a loss of flexibility," he said, adding, "But while any chief of staff needs flexibility, it must not be seen as arbitrariness. And that is the impression gaining ground today."

Yet, the series of allegations and counter allegations only expose the differences among the navy's (and other forces) top brass, and the growing popularity of moving civilian courts instead of seeking redressal within the services itself. But such apparent differences can only wreak havoc in the forces and hurt the chain of command.

"In the armed forces, obedience is the bedrock of discipline. Remember the Charge of the Light Brigade, where soldiers went forward to certain death. If today, every junior challenges his senior's orders, then what will happen to implementation of orders?" asked the retired naval officer, "We believe that even bad orders must be obeyed, otherwise it will only set a bad example."

He blamed the government's attitude for the crisis."If they have take a decision, why don't they go ahead with it? How often can you go on reviewing orders?"

His army counterpart concurred. "Let us remember that in the case of appointments, it is never the decision of a single person or a politician. A committee comprising the chief of staff and his immediate juniors make the decision in tandem with the government. Hence, the government must respect the decision and stand by it."

The former army officer was extremely critical of the government's decision to go against Admiral Bhagwat's recommendation on not appointing Vice-Admiral Harinder Singh. "The navy chief is not a police chief that you send him a letter asking him to reverse his decision. I applaud Bhagwat for having the guts to stand up to the defence ministry."

EARLIER COLUMN:
Mutiny Over The Bounty

The Rediff Specials

Tell us what you think of this feature