Christoislamiterrorist govt hard at work:
http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2008/10/con...eventually.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Congress's hidden agenda to eventually unravel Indian Armed Forces</b>
oct 28th, 2008
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Naresh
A Dangerous Imbalance
A Callous State, An Apathetic Society and Disgruntled Soldiers. The
discontent over the Pay Commission recommendations is just one of the
manifestations of unprecedented turmoil and dissatisfaction in the
armed forces ......
Harsh V. Pant
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodna...ame=harsh&sid=1 <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->From that OLI link:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>A Dangerous Imbalance</b>
A Callous State, An Apathetic Society and Disgruntled Soldiers. The discontent over the Pay Commission recommendations is just one of the manifestations of unprecedented turmoil and dissatisfaction in the armed forces ......
Harsh V. Pant
The discord between the armed services and the Indian government over the Sixth Pay Commission recommendations took a new turn recently when the Army and the Navy decided to defy the government and delay the implementation of the revised salaries till the pay anomalies are sorted out. This happened even as the government was trying to assert its authority with the defence minister categorically informing the three service chiefs that the armed forces cannot unilaterally decide not to implement the decision of the union cabinet. The government is within its right to see the sending out of unclassified signals by the Navy and the Army as a breach of discipline with the some serious broader ramifications. The unprecedented decision of the military chiefs to not notify the cabinet order on the pay commission will have some significant long-term implications.
Though it might be tempting to view the present turmoil in civil-military relations primarily as a dispute over some technicalities in the Pay Commission recommendations, something much more substantial is at stake here. The Navy chief let the cat out of the bag when he suggested that the real issue in the dispute is the command and control relationship between the officers of the armed forces and their civilian counterparts. More than ever, the balance between the Indian state, the Indian society and the nationâs military institutions is out of kilter. This can have grave implications if the equilibrium is not promptly restored because only nations which are successful in evolving a properly balanced pattern of civil-military relations succeed in their search for security while those who fail merely end up squandering their limited resources and put at risk their national security.
A state makes a sacred contract with its soldiers that while they will lay down his/her life when called upon to do so, the nation will take good care of their and their family's needs to the extent its resources would permit. This contract underpins the very survival of a nation as when its territorial integrity and political independence are under threat, the nation looks upon the only instrument that can protect it -- its armed forces. While all governments have to look for a considered bargain between their commitments and power and between power and resources, a responsible government will always be aware of the serious implications of not spending adequate resources on defence.
The debate as it has been made out to be in some quarters between defence and development is a spurious one. Unless adequate provisions are made for defence, no state will be able to pursue its developmental agenda. This is much more important for a country like India that faces a unique security environment with two of its 'adversaries' straddling it on two sides of its borders, problems on all sides of its periphery, and rising internal turmoil. Force remains the ultima ratio in international relations. Politics among nations is conducted in the brooding shadow of violence. Either a state remains able and willing to use force to preserve and enhance its interests or it is forced to live at the mercy of its militarily powerful counterpart.
The Indian society, meanwhile, remains apathetic on defence issues. It makes Kargil into a television spectacle, an opportunity for journalists to try to show off their temporary bravery by going to the frontlines for a few hours and getting the excitement of covering a war from the inside.
 (2 of 2)
And then when it is all over, when the soldiers have been interred into their graves, the society moves on to new and more exciting spectacles -- to our song and dance reality shows and saas-bahu sagas, oblivious to the everyday struggles of the nationâs soldiers on the frontlines.
Shunned by the larger society and ignored by the state, Indian armed forces today are witnessing unprecedented turmoil and dissatisfaction. The discontent over the Pay Commission recommendations is just one of the manifestations of this chaos. The armed forces feel they have never got their due from various pay commissions over the years but the government in its wisdom decided to keep the armed forces away from any representation in the latest Pay Commission. The dominance of bureaucrats meant that while the interests of the bureaucrats were well-recognised, the armed services once again ended up getting a raw deal. The discontent is so serious that some of the best and brightest in our services have refused to go for the Higher Command Courses and more and more are seeking an early retirement. Such turmoil within the ranks of any nationâs armed services should be a cause for concern but in the case of India that aspires to join the ranks of worldâs major global powers this is a recipe for disaster.
There is a broader issue here about the Indian militaryâs growing disdain for their civilian masters and about their knowledge of defence issues. Indian political class lacks any substantive understanding of the role of force in the pursuit of national interests and projecting national values. Moreover, no independent civilian expertise on defence issues is present in India. One can find students writing their PhD theses on Mongoliaâs foreign policy or domestic politics in Belize but hardly any research is encouraged on defence-related issues in Indian universities. As a result, one finds ex-servicemen monopolizing the discourse on national security and defence issues. They should certainly have an important voice on these matters but it should not be the only voice.
Yet it is not entirely clear if the top leadership of the armed forces is really up to the task of harmonizing the growing imbalance in civil-military relations. With their recent defiance, the military chiefs have merely tried to cover their flanks given the overwhelming resentment within their rank and file against the Pay Commission recommendations. While the Indian armed forces have often complained of the politico-bureaucratic nexus thwarting the rights of the defence services, the behavior of the top leadership of the armed services is in danger of being perceived as increasingly petty and bureaucratic itself.
Blaming the government for all the ills afflicting the defence sector seems to be becoming the default position within the ranks of the military and taking this too far can be really dangerous for the liberal democratic ethos of this nation. The state is responsible for the allocation of resources among important societal values of which military security is but one. Moreover, Indian armed forces need fundamental reforms, a restructuring that enables them to operate with utmost efficiency in a rapidly evolving domestic and global context. Amid all the hoopla surrounding the pay commission, it is important to remember that India is losing some precious time by continuing with a defence policy that remains mired in a time-warp. And the onus is on the armed forces leadership to give the Indian defence policy a new direction, a trajectory that does justice to Indiaâs rising stature in the global inter-state hierarchy.
The military exists to serve the state but a military that lacks societal prestige and the attention of the state will not only endanger the security of the state but will also pose a challenge to the liberal societal values that we so love to espouse.It has become imperative now to get the balance between the Indian state, society and its military institutions right if India is to avoid the high costs that will inevitably follow if the present turmoil persists.
Harsh V. Pant teaches at Kingâs College London<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2008/10/con...eventually.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Congress's hidden agenda to eventually unravel Indian Armed Forces</b>
oct 28th, 2008
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Naresh
A Dangerous Imbalance
A Callous State, An Apathetic Society and Disgruntled Soldiers. The
discontent over the Pay Commission recommendations is just one of the
manifestations of unprecedented turmoil and dissatisfaction in the
armed forces ......
Harsh V. Pant
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodna...ame=harsh&sid=1 <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->From that OLI link:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>A Dangerous Imbalance</b>
A Callous State, An Apathetic Society and Disgruntled Soldiers. The discontent over the Pay Commission recommendations is just one of the manifestations of unprecedented turmoil and dissatisfaction in the armed forces ......
Harsh V. Pant
The discord between the armed services and the Indian government over the Sixth Pay Commission recommendations took a new turn recently when the Army and the Navy decided to defy the government and delay the implementation of the revised salaries till the pay anomalies are sorted out. This happened even as the government was trying to assert its authority with the defence minister categorically informing the three service chiefs that the armed forces cannot unilaterally decide not to implement the decision of the union cabinet. The government is within its right to see the sending out of unclassified signals by the Navy and the Army as a breach of discipline with the some serious broader ramifications. The unprecedented decision of the military chiefs to not notify the cabinet order on the pay commission will have some significant long-term implications.
Though it might be tempting to view the present turmoil in civil-military relations primarily as a dispute over some technicalities in the Pay Commission recommendations, something much more substantial is at stake here. The Navy chief let the cat out of the bag when he suggested that the real issue in the dispute is the command and control relationship between the officers of the armed forces and their civilian counterparts. More than ever, the balance between the Indian state, the Indian society and the nationâs military institutions is out of kilter. This can have grave implications if the equilibrium is not promptly restored because only nations which are successful in evolving a properly balanced pattern of civil-military relations succeed in their search for security while those who fail merely end up squandering their limited resources and put at risk their national security.
A state makes a sacred contract with its soldiers that while they will lay down his/her life when called upon to do so, the nation will take good care of their and their family's needs to the extent its resources would permit. This contract underpins the very survival of a nation as when its territorial integrity and political independence are under threat, the nation looks upon the only instrument that can protect it -- its armed forces. While all governments have to look for a considered bargain between their commitments and power and between power and resources, a responsible government will always be aware of the serious implications of not spending adequate resources on defence.
The debate as it has been made out to be in some quarters between defence and development is a spurious one. Unless adequate provisions are made for defence, no state will be able to pursue its developmental agenda. This is much more important for a country like India that faces a unique security environment with two of its 'adversaries' straddling it on two sides of its borders, problems on all sides of its periphery, and rising internal turmoil. Force remains the ultima ratio in international relations. Politics among nations is conducted in the brooding shadow of violence. Either a state remains able and willing to use force to preserve and enhance its interests or it is forced to live at the mercy of its militarily powerful counterpart.
The Indian society, meanwhile, remains apathetic on defence issues. It makes Kargil into a television spectacle, an opportunity for journalists to try to show off their temporary bravery by going to the frontlines for a few hours and getting the excitement of covering a war from the inside.
 (2 of 2)
And then when it is all over, when the soldiers have been interred into their graves, the society moves on to new and more exciting spectacles -- to our song and dance reality shows and saas-bahu sagas, oblivious to the everyday struggles of the nationâs soldiers on the frontlines.
Shunned by the larger society and ignored by the state, Indian armed forces today are witnessing unprecedented turmoil and dissatisfaction. The discontent over the Pay Commission recommendations is just one of the manifestations of this chaos. The armed forces feel they have never got their due from various pay commissions over the years but the government in its wisdom decided to keep the armed forces away from any representation in the latest Pay Commission. The dominance of bureaucrats meant that while the interests of the bureaucrats were well-recognised, the armed services once again ended up getting a raw deal. The discontent is so serious that some of the best and brightest in our services have refused to go for the Higher Command Courses and more and more are seeking an early retirement. Such turmoil within the ranks of any nationâs armed services should be a cause for concern but in the case of India that aspires to join the ranks of worldâs major global powers this is a recipe for disaster.
There is a broader issue here about the Indian militaryâs growing disdain for their civilian masters and about their knowledge of defence issues. Indian political class lacks any substantive understanding of the role of force in the pursuit of national interests and projecting national values. Moreover, no independent civilian expertise on defence issues is present in India. One can find students writing their PhD theses on Mongoliaâs foreign policy or domestic politics in Belize but hardly any research is encouraged on defence-related issues in Indian universities. As a result, one finds ex-servicemen monopolizing the discourse on national security and defence issues. They should certainly have an important voice on these matters but it should not be the only voice.
Yet it is not entirely clear if the top leadership of the armed forces is really up to the task of harmonizing the growing imbalance in civil-military relations. With their recent defiance, the military chiefs have merely tried to cover their flanks given the overwhelming resentment within their rank and file against the Pay Commission recommendations. While the Indian armed forces have often complained of the politico-bureaucratic nexus thwarting the rights of the defence services, the behavior of the top leadership of the armed services is in danger of being perceived as increasingly petty and bureaucratic itself.
Blaming the government for all the ills afflicting the defence sector seems to be becoming the default position within the ranks of the military and taking this too far can be really dangerous for the liberal democratic ethos of this nation. The state is responsible for the allocation of resources among important societal values of which military security is but one. Moreover, Indian armed forces need fundamental reforms, a restructuring that enables them to operate with utmost efficiency in a rapidly evolving domestic and global context. Amid all the hoopla surrounding the pay commission, it is important to remember that India is losing some precious time by continuing with a defence policy that remains mired in a time-warp. And the onus is on the armed forces leadership to give the Indian defence policy a new direction, a trajectory that does justice to Indiaâs rising stature in the global inter-state hierarchy.
The military exists to serve the state but a military that lacks societal prestige and the attention of the state will not only endanger the security of the state but will also pose a challenge to the liberal societal values that we so love to espouse.It has become imperative now to get the balance between the Indian state, society and its military institutions right if India is to avoid the high costs that will inevitably follow if the present turmoil persists.
Harsh V. Pant teaches at Kingâs College London<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->