Political Diary

New Delhi, 31 March 2012

Army Chief Blows Whistle

RAISING MORE ISSUES THAN ANSWERS

By Poonam I Kaushish

It’s the silly political season of washing dirty in public. Be it Team Anna castigating our Right Honourables as “rapists, murderers and looters," Parties slugging it out over brazen ‘horse-trading’ of MLAs for Rajya Sabha’s biennial polls in Jharkhand to the Army Chief-Defence Ministry ‘corruption’ spat. Alas, in this passing-the-parcel finger pointing none come out smelling of roses!

Undeniably, it is no secret that the putrid stench of corruption is all-pervasive in our Government system including in defence deals. But the ugly fracas in our defence establishment over the last six months is unprecedented. It has it genesis in the age row between Army Chief VK Singh and the Government, a battle the General lost in the Supreme Court.

All hell broke loose last week with the General making a sensational disclosure that he was offered a Rs 14 crore bribe by a retired office to buy 600 sub-standard Tatra trucks for the army in 2010 and had brought this to Defence Minister Antony’s notice.

But before the storm could abate, he lobbed a letter bomb to the Prime Minister underscoring the Army’s “unpreparedness” for war due to “deficiencies of weapons and obsolete air defence.” Followed by an eight-month-old letter alleging corruption by a serving Lt General, in line to be Chief, which he forwarded to the CBI for a probe.

Raising several moot points: Why is the General raising the issue just eight weeks before his retirement? Why didn’t he put his accusations down in writing when Antony asked him? As Army Chief, he could have instituted an inquiry and pinned down the culprit. If in 2010 did not want to pursue the matter, why is he today claiming that he has a lot of evidence, why was he withholding it? Would he have done this if he had won the age row?

Importantly, under Service rules, the Army Chief had several options to clean his backyard instead of just complaining. He could have sent a letter to the Minister confirming his allegations. Or sent for the file and recorded that he was offered a bribe, which he refused, and had reported it to the Defence Minister. Issued instructions banning the retired officer and report him to the military police. Singh did neither.

The Defence Minister too could have recorded a note in the relevant file about the General’s disclosure and immediately asking the CBI to investigate the matter instead of losing two crucial years. Or refer the matter to the Prime Minister. Why did neither of them initiate action against the briber?

Importantly, the bribery issue aside, how are the General and Minister tackling the issue of ‘sub-standard’ trucks that have purchased? Are they being recalled? Why was BEML acting as a middleman between Tatra and the Army? When the Tatra truck costs Rs 40 lakh, who authorised their purchase from BEML at roughly Rs 1 crore apiece? Notwithstanding BEML denial on any pay-offs on the Tatra truck deal. Is the manufacturer being hauled up? Is there any effort to replace these with indigenous trucks?

Indeed, the country is facing a strange situation where two honest men, ‘Saint’ Antony and ‘truthful’ Singh are caught in storms of huge scams in their departments. True, none doubt their genuineness but at the same time can sincerity be an excuse for inactivity? Remember, a bribe offer to the Army Chief is an extremely serious matter. It is not for the Defence Minister or his babus to decide whether the matter should rest there.

Significantly, all is not lost. In fact, the Army Chief’s ‘letter bomb’ is a silver lining to this entire tu-tu-mein-mein. Our polity should forget about who leaked the Chief’s letter to the Prime Minister, instead concentrate on our security forces requirements, address deficiencies in our defence procurement system, urgent up-gradation of equipment and arms to ensure our forces' readiness to face the enemy and emerge victorious. Everything else is secondary.

Our leaders need to address crucial issues. Pertinently, why do we buy nearly all the equipment for the army from abroad? Is there no standard procedure for the army and Defence Ministry to assess their requirements and procure the identified material? We need to develop an indigenous defence industry, whether by encouraging domestic private players to participate or by increasing FDI in the sector. Especially as India's has emerged as the world's largest importer over 2006-10, accounting for 9% of the world's arms imports. There is something seriously wrong if we cannot make trucks to the Indian Army’s specifications!

Undoubtedly, in this entire episode all the principle players have egg on their face. Surely, the Army Chief knew that even as he exposed corruption in defence purchases, he was overlooking a vital fact: Hurting the army’s image. This collateral damage is more serious.  Equally, the Government could have handled it discretely and with more finesse. 

Notably, the relationship between the Government and Armed Forces is delicate, wherein the Government’s supremacy is unquestioned. But it too has a duty to nurture this relationship. The Constitution provides institutionalised mechanisms for civilian and defence forces to listen and to talk to each other.

Happily, for now all seems to be well with the Army Chief asserting there were “rogue elements” trying to create a “schism” between him and the Defence Minister. This was in response to Antony expressing the Government's confidence in the three service Chiefs. But both sides don’t trust each other as too much water has flown under the bridge. Leading to crossed fingers.

What next? Time for the Government to put in to force the recommendations made by various defence committees. It needs to set up clear guidelines and, consequently, a robust defence procurement policy. Middlemen should be physically banned, not in namesake alone. A thought should be given to adopting the American model wherein instead of an unworkable blanket ban of all ‘agents and lobbying, allow all to register thereby bringing transparency into the deals.  

In the ultimate, there is no gainsaying that dirty linen has to be cleaned, but not in public. Even as media goes to town and MPs bray for the Army chief's head, the Defence Ministry and Army Chief, need to stop acting like Après moi, le déluge (I don't care what happens next, I'll be gone) and permanently bury the hatchet, show restraint and deliver. For in this mêlée there are no winners, only a loser -- the country. Comprenez-vous?  ---- INFA 

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)