Tags:
Journalism of Courage
It has been complained that the Sachar Committee is engaged in an exercise to count the number of Muslims and their hierarchical levels in the Indian army. This committee is reported to have been set up to assess the socio-economic, educational, etc, status of Muslims so that, based thereon, relevant initiatives may be launched to provide better opportunities for the uplift of this community.
While Parliament has only recently enacted a law to vest our citizenry with the right of information, it is a matter for most serious concern that even six decades after Independence we have still to develop an adequately mature approach in dealing with matters relating to our armed forces.
An inability to maturely deal with issues of high national importance arises from the failure of political parties to follow a bi-partisan approach in regard to such matters, particularly those which may impinge on any aspect of national security. Hurriedly levelled criticism against the government and populist statements have the potential of having national interests. Hasty reporting and hurried commentaries on sensitive issues could also result in compromising national security interests.
In the instant case, the matter has already been wholesomely politicised. Former Defence Minister George Fernandes has complained that the Sachar Committee exercise is a “seditious act” which amounts to “communalising” the armed forces. Abhishek Singhvi, the Congress spokesperson, has countered that this survey is “purely a data gathering and fact finding exercise” and “attribution of motive is completely misplaced”. Senior opposition leaders have made excited statements which seek to expose the governmental “conspiracy”. Not to be left behind, various ex-servicemen’s organisations are scaling Raisina Hill and beseeching the Supreme Commander to put an immediate stop to the activities underway which shall tarnish the secular fabric of the armed forces.
As regards the queries raised by the Sachar Committee, it is quite obvious that its functionaries failed to recognise the consequences of seeking the information that it sought from the defence ministry, and the questionable hierarchical form in which it wanted the data.
The failure of the committee’s secretariat to display the requisite sensitivity in seeking the impugned information from the defence ministry reflects yet another concern: the woeful lack of understanding in our country of matters relating to defence and national security. It is indeed most unfortunate that very few among our politicians, bureaucracy, media and the intelligentsia have had adequate exposure to national security related issues. If this were not so, the very terms of reference of the Sachar Committee would have been so framed as to ensure against the armed forces being asked to furnish the kind of information which they are not mandated to collect or maintain.
It would be perverse to assume that any government would ever take any step which may result in “communalising” our armed forces. It is, therefore, not clear why this so called controversy was allowed to gather momentum. After the very first media report on the issue, Justice Sachar could have given a television interview to put the matter squarely at rest. Instead, it was reported that the PMO had “distanced” itself in that it had had no role to play in the actual functioning of the committee after its establishment. Raksha Mantri’s Calcutta statement also came after several days. Meanwhile, thanks to the media pursuit, this matter has been politicised to the extent of raising serious misgivings about the very basis on which our armed forces are constituted.
As one who worked for the security forces for many years, I feel deeply distressed over the on-going controversy and the highly emotive allegations which have been raised to create an environment of distrust among the rank an file of our armed forces.
An inviolable source of our army’s strength is embedded in its centuries old regimental history and traditions. “Izzat” and “Iqbal” have a far deeper meaning for our men in olive green than for those treading the civilian walks of life. After Independence we gave up the colonial recognition of “martial races” but fully preserved and carried forward the “martial traditions”. Recruitment to the army is open to all those who satisfy the laid-down qualifications. Even though our fighting units comprise men and officers drawn from all parts of the country, speaking different languages, devoted to different religions and brought up in vastly varying socio-cultural traditions, every military formation is a homogenous entity and a perfect example of secularism. “Caste”, “creed”, “religion”, “reservation” and “quota” are words which are unheard of in regimental messes.
The composition of our infantry regiments is time tested. While a candidate’s religious identity would be recorded at the time of initial recruitment, such data has no relevance in the subsequent careers of the officers and men. All promotions and appointments are based on performance and merit. Consequently, data relating to caste, ethnicity and religion is not required to be maintained by the three armed forces.
Besides a handful of regiments — Jat, Sikh, Garhwal, Kumaon, etc — which are historically based on fixed composition, the recruitment to all other formations is on an all-India and all-class basis and the overall balance is maintained by the total recruitment being capped by the recruitable male population (RMP) formula which is enforced state-wise.
It is the bounden duty of the state governments, duly advised, guided and supported by the Central government, to continue taking necessary steps to improve the lot of the minority communities. As regards the destinies of those who join the armed forces, of whatever creed, let this remain the total responsibility of the chiefs of staff of the services and of India’s Raksha Mantri. Any misguided tinkering or interference may entail an unbearable national cost.
N.N. Vohra is a former defence and home secretary and principal secretary to the prime minister
