Keeping the rank and file motivated in the face of falling service conditions is becoming difficult
Media reports that the Defence Minister has directed the three Chiefs of Staff — through the Chairman, Chiefs of Staff Committee — to implement the Seventh Central Pay Commission (CPC) award without any further delay, are extraordinary. Equally so are those on how in an unprecedented step, the Chiefs of Staff have been writing to the Defence Minister and the Prime Minister, highlighting the core anomalies in the award and for implementing the CPC after their resolution.
These anomalies are said to include certain iniquitous allowances and not awarding non-functional upgradations of pay to the armed forces which the civilian bureaucracy enjoys. The Defence Minister’s directions appear to be based on the view that the chiefs’ concerns have already been referred to the Empowered Committee of Secretaries. The chiefs’ concerns are based on two incontrovertible factorsviz. that an appellant can expect no justice where the appellate itself comprises appellees and that many of anomalies in the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth CPCs still remain unresolved.
A steady erosion
Now, a look at history. The stature, pay and pension of the armed forces — officers and men alike — have all been downscaled relative to their civilian counterparts in the Government of India ever since Independence. The pay commissions go through the presentations of the representatives of all affected parties directly. However, in the case of the armed forces, these projections have to be routed through the Ministry of Defence and its bureaucracy. Unlike all other government servants, the conditions of service in the armed forces, inter alia, prohibit them from forming an association. The armed forces, from officer to jawan, have been pushed back even further by each CPC. Their protests have ended in a ping-pong match, with a fraction being granted and some issues closed or left open-ended. Governments of all political ideologies and hues were party to it as the approving authority and the civilian bureaucracy was the constant contestant-cum-dispenser. Thus, there has been a systematic erosion of their standing relative to other functionaries of the state, further exacerbated by a dilution of their direct interface with the political leadership since Independence.
Thus, the armed forces personnel rely on their chiefs to protect their interests. Many chiefs have protested against the unfairness of it all to the government of the day — each in his own way, but all very respectfully for fear of being misunderstood. And, they have not shared their travails with their subordinates, once again for fear of being misunderstood. So, a number of former defence chiefs will probably be judged not very charitably as the armed forces have got progressively marginalised.
There are fundamental differences between the armed forces and the Central armed police forces. The armed forces defend the nation within and beyond the national boundaries and act against any force that poses a threat to national security. They are manned, trained, equipped and deployed accordingly. The police forces are confined within the nation’s boundaries with their task being to police, guard and prosecute crime. Their roles are clear in their hardware and tools of business. Due to differences between the two in terms of constitution, composition, equipment, assigned and delivered tasks, service conditions, and working, they are incomparable entities. Armed forces personnel obey all legal orders given by their superiors. Thus they can be “officered” and headed by their own cadre. Historically, our military leadership has been effective because the senior upholds the interests of his juniors and does not let down his own superiors.
The soldier today
Unlike in the past, the soldier today is educated and aware of the world. He not only has aspirations but also expects what is due to him. Being disciplined, he does not speak up; but shortfalls demotivate him. Keeping the rank and file motivated in the face of falling service conditions is becoming an increasingly difficult task for military superiors today. The media revolution has enhanced the awareness levels of our soldiers/sailors and airmen through instant information. Inspite of being deployed even in the remotest locations, they are abreast of the goings-on between their chiefs and the political leadership. Therefore, contentious issues need to be handled with immense sensitivity, sensibility and utmost responsibility. The incumbent chiefs have demonstrated these in an exemplary manner through public sharing of information. In contrast, selective media leaks, half-truths and innuendos which have proliferated in recent years with no attendant responsibility can be found at the other end of spectrum.
In our system, the layer of insularity provided by the civilian bureaucracy filters even the advice given by professional heads, viz. the chiefs. Thus, vested interests in this institution, whose stated objective is to maintain its own primacy in governance of the nation, are now undermining another institution which has rightly earned respect for being the last bastion of upholding national security — in times of war; peace; natural calamities; counter-insurgency; civil unrest; and even running essential services. The visit by the Chief of Army Staff to Srinagar recently, and at the behest of the Centre, to reshape the security order there, is a very specific indicator of this.
In the current security environment, both globally and regionally, a robust political backbone is required to restore the standing, honour and dignity of the armed forces, who, unfortunately, in our system have come to be denoted directly by pay, perks and warrant of precedence.
Vice Admiral Pradeep Kaushiva (retd.) is Former Commandant, National Defence College, New Delhi.
No comments:
Post a Comment