Home

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) often finds itself unable to take a decision in such disputes as its civilian bureaucrats lack the required military expertise. There is also no single individual or organisation in the country from which it can get unbiased advice. Cases therefore tend to linger on, giving the MoD the infamous tag of being the slowest in decision-making.

An example is the Army’s request in the late seventies for its own aviation branch, such as is available with most of the major armies in the world, including Pakistan. This was bitterly opposed by the Air Force because it felt that it transgressed into an area that it considered exclusively it own. Unable to resolve the issue, the MoD dithered on it for over a decade before the Army Aviation Corps was finally sanctioned.

The genesis of the current tussle over the allocation of the higher ranks proposed by the Committee headed by AV Singh lies in the decision by the Government in the early eighties to upgrade some of the ranks in the three Services. This was in response to the urgent request by the three Services for steps to improve the career prospects of its officers and men. Upgrading the ranks was a simplistic way of getting around a complex problem and it actually resulted not in the upgradation but the devaluation of ranks.

The Services reluctantly accepted the government’s decision after it ruled out all the other practicable options. Now, with stagnation having set in once again, the AV Singh Committee has recommended another dose of the same. Whatever be the problems this course of action has created, there is now no going back on it as the first part of the report pertaining to the junior ranks has already been implemented.

In the eighties, the appointments to be upgraded were selected independently by each Service without coordination with the other two. This resulted in distorting the existing parity in ranks and promotions between the three. While one Service upgraded a particular appointment, the equivalent appointment in the other Service was often not upgraded and continued to be held by the lower rank. For example, the appointment of an Instructor Class A in a joint training institution was upgraded to a Colonel by the Army but continued to be held by a Wing Commander (equivalent to a Lieutenant Colonel) of the Air Force, leading to needless heart burning and tension.

Parity in promotions was similarly affected. Officers with more Service seniority at times had to serve under junior officers but higher rank from another Service as promotions were faster in the latter. Similar situations also occurred in joint Services committees, where the presiding officer was sometimes junior in Service but higher in rank to some of the members. The ongoing controversy for allocation of a larger share of higher ranks by the three Services should be seen against this background.

The affected Services do not want such anomalies to be created once again or the previous ones to persist. Unions and associations are not permitted in the armed forces; nor are they allowed to agitate and put forward their demands. Even a joint letter of grievance signed by many is frowned upon and in extreme cases may even be regarded as an act of mutiny. There is no forum in which the armed forces can vent their grievances. It is for the seniors to fight for the interests and welfare of their subordinates. That is the culture of the armed forces.

In the issue in question, each Service has its own reasons for demanding additional ranks. The Army points out that it has the largest number of officers but proportionately the smallest number of higher ranks. It has also been involved in active operations from day one of Independence and continues to be deployed in the most difficult terrains away from their families. The Army has suffered maximum battle casualties and is even today facing bullets in anti-terrorist and counter-insurgency operations in J&K and the North East. Army officers feel de-motivated when they find that their counterparts in the other Services, who have been serving in far better conditions and perhaps never faced a bullet, are getting faster promotions.

The Navy and the Air Force want additional higher ranks on the basis of functional requirements-- with the emergence of India as a regional power in Asia there will be increasing importance of air and sea power. There is some force in this argument. The MoD finds itself unable to resolve the issue as it has little military expertise or knowledge about the inner working of the armed forces. It has therefore done what it always does when the three Services differ; it has asked them to find a mutually satisfactory solution. If they are unable to do so, then the MoD will be compelled to take a decision because the matter can not be left hanging for too long.

Much has been made of the fact that the armed forces, which are supposed to be disciplined, have not accepted the government’s decision outright. There is no question of indiscipline here. It is the duty of commanders at all levels to apprise the higher authorities of the adverse consequences of their directions and recommend suitable alternatives. In this case the three Services have submitted to the government their views on the proposal and their recommendations. Let the final decision be taken by the MoD. There is no doubt that the three Services will accept it without reservations and implement it in a disciplined manner.---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

< Previous		Next >

[ Back ]