WHY SHALL THERE BE AFSPA IF A CIVIL MAGISTRATE CAN ORDER ARMY TO FIRE IN AID TO CIVIL AUTHORITY? IS IT SO? EVERY IAS MUST READ IT

Many Politicians, civil bureaucracy and people have the wrong impression that in Aid to Civil Power, a magistrate can order Army to open fire. In view of same an argument is being pushed that if a magistrate can order army to fire then why shall there be AFSPA?

The same argument is also given by many IAS to propound a theory of their supremacy over commissioned officers of army with the statement that in peace time only Army Brigadier can order fire where as in civil a Collector can do it? So a Army brigadier is equal to Collector. Based on this argument many states govt in clear violation of Order of Precedence set by Central Govt, have issued their own Order of Precedence equating Collector with an Army Brigadier.

The argument has also been used to tweak army pay structure to bring it down. One senior IAS officer used same argument before 7 pay commission recommendations were made to put down armed forces pay structures and also to deny OROP to them.

Ignorance may be bliss but it becomes a curse if the same is used to govern the country to promote ulterior motives of establishing unfounded and illegal authorities by arrogant and corrupt establishments. What is the right legal position then? As per constitution and law, Armed forces can be used by govt as under:

1. To wage war against enemies any where in the world and within country under Defense of India Act and Rules.

2.   Under emergency provisions of constitution where Govt can declare emergency in whole country or part on grounds of deteriorating security situations and use military force by decree.

3.  Under Armed Forces Special Powers Act when the area is declared disturbed by a state govt under an elected govt or under president rule.

4. Under provisions of Cr PC 130 wherein an Executive Magistrate of highest rank; in this case a collector, can order army to disperse an unlawful assembly.

5. Under provisions of Cr PC 131 wherein any commissioned officer or gazetted officer ( JCO; Subedar or Nb Subedar) can disperse such unlawful assembly using military force as he seems fit but shall communicate with  an Executive Magistrate; Collector, in shortest possible time.

6. Under indirect provisions of Martial Law under  article 34 of the constitution wherein an officer of the rank of Brigadier and above, in case civil govt collapsing due to any reason, can declare martial law in any part of the country or in whole country as applicable as per their jurisdiction to restore the authority of civil govt as envisaged in the constitution.

In above provisions as given in point 3 and 4, the immunity has been given to member of armed forces from arrest under sec 45 of the Cr PC unless sanctioned by the central govt. Under provisions of law as mentioned in point 1 above, the law gives tremendous powers to central govt and armed forces to the extend of applying military law to civilians.Under the law as mentioned in point 2 above central govt may provide immunity in existing sec 45 of Cr PC or make any other law under a decree. Under AFSPA act as mentioned above in point 3, it itself repeats the provision of section 45 of the Cr PC. Under Martial law armed forces itself can make laws to provide them immunity.

As per constitution, the law and order is a state subject and defense of India is the subject of central govt. Going by the spirit of the constitution, military force shall not be used against own citizens unless a law and order problem is throwing a serious security challenge to defense of India. Or in other words, if a law and order problem escalates into a scrutiny threat and state govt finds it difficult to control it within given legal authority and means using all other forces at its disposal, state govt or central govt may call upon army to assist state govt in restoring law and order by using military force. Accordingly above legal provisions have been made to deal with entire spectrum of  intensities of violence which may be used by unlawful assemblies threatening law and order.

With above provisions in mind, let us come back to the argument being propounded for scraping AFSPA on ground that if a Magistrate has powers to order army to fire to disperse an unlawful assembly then why shall there be AFSPA?    

Let us assume a situation when there is no AFSPA. What are the provisions then available to state govt to use military force? It is only under section 130 of Cr Pc, an executive magistrate of highest rank (Collector) exercising authority of state govt, can requisition army to disperses an unlawful assembly. Let us discuss this section in some more detail.

Sub section 130 (1) makes the provision for use of military force to disperse unlawful assembly by an executive magistrate of highest rank exercising the state authority.

Sub section 130 (2) further explains the manner in which an executive magistrate shall require army to disperse an unlawful assembly  and use the words 'with the help of the armed forces'. It means this section doesn't put armed forces under the command of the executive magistrate.

Sub section 130 (3) explains the manner in which armed forces shall respond to such requisitions made by an executive magistrate of highest rank (collector) exercising state authority.  It says:

"Every such officer of the armed forces shall obey such requisition in such manner as he thinks fit, but in doing so he shall use as little force, and as little injury to person and property, as may be consistent with dispersing and arresting and detaining such person".  

Let us see what are the implications of this subsection. The use word 'obey' means that armed forces have no authority to refuse such requisition made by an executive magistrate but the same sentence also puts a condition 'in such manner as he thinks fit'. That means an officer of armed forces retains the authority to make his decision and use his military power as vested in him by law to select how much force and in what manner shall be used to disperse and arrest and detain.  Executive magistrate has no authority over armed forces and can not order how much force to use, when to fire, where to fire, how to fire and what to fire?  

The section 130 of Cr PC doesn't specify at what moment the authority of state to maintain law and order is transferred  or passed to officer of the armed forces by an executive magistrate acting under the provisions of law and for how much period? The issues has been debated in length by the various HC and SC and based on their observations and also in few cases executive magistrates blaming army of using military force on their own, a procedure has been adopted wherein army only accepts written requisition mentioning date and time from an executive magistrate. Accordingly every officer including a NCO of the armed forces deployed in such duties carry a form of requisition and it is signed jointly with executive magistrate before officer of armed forces orders troops under his command to use military force to disperse and arrest and detain unlawful assembly.

The section 130 is silent on the aspect that when will the officer of armed forces, who has taken over control of situation  from an executive magistrate under a written requisition signed jointly will hand over the control back to executive magistrate. However if this aspect is seen under the provisions of section 131 of IPC then it become clear that an executive magistrate can ask officer of the armed forces the control of situation back. Accordingly every officer of the armed forces including a NCO deployed on such duties carry a printed form which is signed jointly by officer of the armed forces and executive magistrate to hand over control of situation back to executive magistrate. 

A very interesting legal aspect of authority shall be noted here.  The legal provision uses the word executive magistrate of the highest rank but it may not be possible for a collector to be present on all disturbed spots therefore such authority in such situation is delegated to authorized magistrates who are civil gazetted officers. Similarly in case of armed force as per their operating procedures, the word 'officer' also includes NCO. So how does armed forces operate complying with provisions of civil and military laws both?  So for meeting the requirement of law, the requisition form can only be signed by a commissioned officer or a JCO from armed forces. However such commissioned officer or a JCO under military law and operating procedure can order a NCO to exercise power to disperse and arrest and detain. That mean in case of armed forces the state powers of the magistrate are exercised by NCO too. The AFSPA act actually makes it more clear when in the definition of officer of armed forces, NCO has been included. 

Now let us come back to the main question as raised under the subject heading; "Why shall AFSPA be there if a civil magistrate can order army to fire in aid to civil authority'? Following facts and issues which emerge from explanations as given above are given below.

1. A Civil Magistrate has no authority over armed forces to order fire.

2. Armed forces are used in aid to civil authority only for short duration and are related to disturbed situation at a spot and not an area or region.

3. In areas which are infested with insurgency where state of armed rebellion exists or area is disturbed due to  high intensity of violence existing or likely to erupt, what if a magistrate doesn't requisition armed forces under threat of insurgents or terrorists allowing state administration to collapse?  

There have been various instances where magistrates have denied requisitioning army even in riots infested areas forcing army to only accept written requisitions.  If such things can happen in normal peace times where riots have erupted it is most likely that in a insurgency infested area, a magistrate under threat may not even requisition armed forces.

Shall in such situation central govt or state govt allow civil administration to collapse and force either army to impose martial law or central govt  to impose emergency? Keeping in line with right spirit of the constitution, democracy and freedom it is imperative upon central govt to avoid declaration of emergency or armed forces imposing martial law.

To manage disturbed situation of insurgency or threats from armed criminals and terrorists and also maintain right spirit of democracy under an elected state govt, Central Govt had no choice except to bring special laws in form of disturbed area act and AFSPA or suitably amend sections 130 and 131 of Cr PC to give armed forces special powers to deal with the situation with out reference to requisitioning procedure by the magistrate.

Under Disturbed Area Act the state govt has been actually empowered to requisition armed forces for maintenance of law and order for up to 6 months instead of magistrate under section 130 of Cr PC for shorter duration. AFSPA act actually gives no extra authority to armed forces but only reiterates provisions of Cr PC in more forceful manner  Actually Distruebd Area Act and AFSPA act can be scrapped if section 130 and 131 of IPC are suitably amended. But will it make difference? No. The operating procedure of armed forces will still remain same however it will extend the application of such laws to whole country instead of special laws having been made applicable to few disturbed states only.

Now question is, shall state govt keep extending Disturbed Area Act by renewing its notification every 6 months? So issue is not the law itself but its application? Citizens are fundamentally right and take to street when they find themselves subjected to military force for a longer period. It breeds more discontentment and forces more youths to pick up arms in rebellion.

Why shall central govt and state govt insist on use of armed forces for law and order problem and expect use of lathis and other soft forces by armed forces? Better is not to use armed forces if situation has improved. It will be highly dangerous to use army for milder force as it will blunt the sharp edge of their power which they use against enemies and also make soldiers softer. Provisions of section 131 are already there for armed forces to use military force on their own in case of they being attacked? Same can be suitably amended to satisfy concerns of the armed forces of security of their men, material and movements.

On contrary armed forces are not happy with existing legal provisions to fight proxy wars fueled by neighbors like in Kahmir and find provisions of AFSPA highly inadequate due to following reasons

1. Armed forces have no powers to investigate which makes their intelligence network totally ineffective thereby making their operations blunt and directionless. Intelligence provided by other agencies proves to be highly unreliable and many times have led soldiers to be ambushed.

2. In such proxy war subjected areas like Kashmir, state criminal justice system  comes under threat of armed rebellions and foreign agents and fails to convict such arrested enemies fighting proxy wars with state. It results in a situation where in though armed forces have convicted almost 2000 plus soldiers on charges of human right violations but state criminal justice system has not punished even a single enemy. It results in soldiers asking a very natural question. State is with whom? Enemies or soldiers? It affects their moral dangerously.

Keeping in mind the frustration of harassed people, problems of soldiers, spirit of law, freedom and democracy and requirements of military operations there is surely a need to review the situation and come up with better legal arrangements. The following strategy shall be adopted:

1. Distinguish between proxy wars and internal armed rebellions. Like in Kashmir it is proxy war and in Assam it is a armed rebellion by criminals.

2. Use armed forces only in case of proxy wars and high intensity armed rebellion but not more than 3 - 5 years.  In rest of situation use either PMF like RR or use CAPF like BSF or CRPF.

3. For using armed forces in situations of proxy wars and high intensity armed rebellion empower armed forces with powers of investigations and  constitute military courts to punish arrested enemies in shortest possible time. It will make operations of armed forces sharp and will help in controlling situation in 3-5 years time rather than keep fighting for decades. The fear of armed forces coming back with military courts will keep subvertive  emotions and thoughts of people under check. In such situation the state shall be brought under president rule. Make special new laws accordingly.

4. In other situation of armed rebellion, only PMF like RR or CAPF like CRPF shall be used. Amend Cr PC sections 130 and 131 accordingly for:

a. Armed forces to come for assistance to civil authority for not more than 3 months or shall conduct special joint surgical operations against identified potential targets.

b.  Allow armed forces to keep collecting intelligence and  joint investigations in key incidents so that when they are called upon troops are equipped with specific intelligence for conducting effective operations. Troops then can go back to barracks after fishing their task within 3 months.

c. Empower armed forces  to act in self defense by further strengthening section 131 of CrPC as attacks on armed forces by terrorists can happen anywhere in the country.

5. After making above provisions, scrap AFSPA.

Let us understand, to avoid imposition of martial law and state of emergency which are not good for the health of democracy, it is obligatory on part of central and state govt  to make special legal provisions to back criminal justice system to deal with the situation of armed rebellion and proxy wars. Only thinking of armed forces or PMF or CAPF fighting armed enemies or insurgents or terrorist with out making criminal justice system effective and responsive will land  us in a messy situation where we have reached now.

Subjecting citizens under military force for longer duration countermands the spirit of democracy, respect and freedom as assured under our constitution.  We must adopt a system where common citizen is subject to such hardship of disturbed situation due to armed rebellion for shortest possible time. Disturbed Area Act and AFSPA are inadequate to deal with the situation and surely we need to scrap it by making suitable changes or replacing it with some special laws to deal with situations like proxy wars, high intensity armed rebellion and armed rebellions.

For doing above, we need to first educate law makers, IAS officers, judiciary, CAPF, armed forces officers and people, about the gravity of situation and inadequate response which such disturbed situation is getting allowing it to simmer for longer periods thus making citizens to suffer hardship for longer periods and turning youths into enemies. Very responsible people asking such question as given in subject tagline surely indicated a very high levels of ignorance prevailing in many minds.

Surely enough our NCO and JCO deserve better respect and pay as they exercise the powers of civil magistrates. It is not a Brigadier of Army who is equivalent to an collectors as have been decided by few states violating warrant of precedence of central govt but JCO who as a gazetted officer can sign requisition with him and his status as given by law shall be respected. By law commissioned officers are vested with executive powers of the state like civil political authority and comparing them with administrative gazetted officers who support such executive political authority is highly unconstitutional.































        

  

.





  

Concept of Civil Military Parity; Defence Forces; Third Pillar of Governance

Rewards by 7th Pay Commission to defense forces and its acceptance by BJP Govt has send shock waves and disbelief among soldiers. On promise of Narendra Modi, Soldiers voted in mass for BJP govt hoping to get justice for a humiliating and unconstitutional treatment given to them by Cong Govt under Mrs Indra Gandhi just after a historic win in 1971 war with Pakistan.

Mrs Gandhi; instead of rewarding soldiers for their unparalleled historic victory gave them humiliating injustice in 1973 by reducing their status, pay and pension drastically. Mrs Gandhi not only gave shabby treatment to soldiers but she also tweaked promotion procedures of military to have better control to create a succession line for top military Generals and Chiefs. The arrangements put by her in place went much beyond keeping a justified constitutional loyalty check on senior leadership to create her personal team of loyalist Generals. Caste and religion factor also became important to her. Though detrimental to national security, she was successful to a large extent in subverting professional military leadership to create submissive line of loyalists. Her returns were immediate when top military leadership failed to oppose unconstitutional declaration of emergency. Though military leadership was nervous and they later advised her to lift it to restore democracy but the damage was already done. The submissive line of generals so created with personal loyalties failed to oppose her decision to attack Golden Temple. They also failed to oppose decision of Rajive Gandhi to launch "OP PAWAN" in Sri Lanka. They also failed in their constitutional duty to intervene to prevent Sikh genocide in Delhi. Army Chiefs and leadership were not even consulted for military fall outs when Bajpai Govt signed Lahore declaration, it resulted in Kargil War.  Now the situation is that political Govt refuses to even acknowledge presence of Military Chiefs and leadership in their decision making procedures thus debarring themselves from a professional military advice risking national security.

With above situation in existence yet another severe blow has been delivered by BJP's Modi Govt to further crush the pride of soldiers. Acceptance of humiliating recommendations of 7th Pay Commission for defense forces by BJP Govt ignoring concerns of military leadership and veterans has put soldiers in state of shock. The situation now is that soldiers, who are backbone of national military and nuke power to protect national sovereignty, in terms of life time earnings, are now paid lesser than Forest Guards and Central Armed Police Force. Life Time earnings in eyes of HR professionals is a single most key parameter to judge how rewarding a career is?   Life Time Earnings of any career forms the base of creating a reward system in terms of compensations. With 7th Pay Commission recommendations in place a reward system has been created where soldier's life time earnings are above home guards and below forest guards. The acceptance of humiliating recommendations of 7th Pay Commission for defense forces has no professional  justification and violates all established professional HR principles of creating a reward system for a career.

The ego based whims and fancies of insecure, corrupt and lustful political Govt establishment without any accountability, justifications and reasoning to over control military power of the nation might even crush the very defense apparatus which protects and provides space for democracy to function. Indian constitution under article 53 while giving out executive powers of the union, clearly recognizes executive military authority of the nation as vested in a civilian Supreme Commander  as distinct dimension and gives it a key executive role in support of democracy by creating loyalties of defense forces to the command authority of its supreme commander, military commanders, constitution and we the people. Military oaths of allegiance are accordingly structured. Article 53 of Indian constitution if read in conjunction with article 34 on martial law and military oath taken, establishes a well defined role for executive military authority of the nation to defend and protect constitutional rights and freedom of "We The People". It is therefore constitutional duty of military leadership to stand up in defense of democracy if it is under threat from any corner. It may be from corrupt politicians controlled by crony capitalists with suspected loyalties creating caste and communal hate filled atmosphere for political power and which may also trigger civil wars.  With such distinct provisions in constitution about roles of executive military authority,  article 309-313 therefore accept distinct military service conditions and demands separate laws for their service conditions including distinct compensation  packages for them.

Our constitution recognizes three pillars of governance and not two as is taught or perceived.  First pillar is the executive political authority of the nation exercised by elected President through democratically elected parliament and government and assisted by civil servants. Second pillar of governance is national judiciary. It is the prime duty of  Chief Justice of India to defend constitution by giving right interpretation of the constitutional provisions and laws to the govt and people thereby helping govt in establishing rule of law. Third pillar is executive military authority of the nation which is exercised by a civilian Supreme Commander of defense forces and military commanders under authority of command given to them under provisions of warrants or commission. Each Officer and JCO of the Indian military is therefore given authority of command by a parchment of commission after he/her takes oath of allegiance. Such parchment of commission are signed by an authorized military officer (not by PM or any minister or IAS) under a warrant signed by Supreme commander that is President. Constitution recognizes distinct status of these commissioned officers and therefore gives them the privilege of using their ranks as titles prefixing these before their names under constitution article 18.

With structure of these three pillars, our constitution ensures that a healthy and socialist democracy protects the freedom, respect and dignity of we the people. The military authority which is third pillar of democracy remains in silent but observant mode beyond public visibility during peace times wherein democratically elected government is given complete space to exercise their authority interpreted by second pillar of Judiciary. Though in national wars or disturbed areas military predominantly becomes active and visible but under emergency and special legal provisions of the constitution, it still remains under political directions of the elected civil govt. It is only when there are direct threats to civil political authorities and judiciary where in these institutions are unable to function due to any reasons or threat, Military Authorities under article 34 of the constitution are duty bound to take command of situation to restore civilian authority to protect democracy, dignity and freedom of we the people. During peace and war times it is duty of each military commissioned officer to remain politically observant and that is the reason in their oaths word "OBSERVE" finds the place.

No govt of the day shall defy constitution and its spirit to serve people. In relation to military authority and service condition of the soldiers, every govt is legally bound to respect constitutional provisions. On eve of national independence the question of how to compensate soldiers as per their constitutional roles, was faced by members of constituent assembly elected to draft constitution. J L Nehru then formed a committee to recommend compensation structure for soldiers of independent India. It was first time then the principle of parity only for compensation of soldiers was accepted. These principle of parity of soldiers only for compensation were in line with constitution being framed. Major salient point of these principles were:

1. Length of the service of the military officers and soldiers will be key detrimental factor to create parity of status and compensation with IAS and civil servants.

2. Life time earnings of soldiers will have an marginal edge over others civilian govt staff.

3. To ensure above 75% pension will be given to soldiers and 50% to military officers who retire young as against only 25 or 30% to the civilians. Though the same is subject to change but fundamentally such change shall not violate principles as given in points 1 and 2 above.

The above principles of parity for status and compensation of soldiers were fundamentally based on sound established professional HR practices which are even so relevant today.

It was Mrs Gandhi, who after gaining political victory over Pakistan based on a landslide military victory given by soldiers, started treating herself as goddess and developed dictatorial attributes and aspirations. A forthright professional military advice coming from true military leaders loyal to democracy like FM Sam Manekshaw, was taken as threat to her aspirations to become master of political power of India and become immortal. In 1973 accordingly, to serve her personal interests and dictatorial aspirations, she tweaked military promotion system and also delivered a blow to their status and compensation packages to make them weak and helpless. Idea was to cut military leaders below knees of politicians and civilian babus to eliminate any obstacle in their unconstitutional aspirations and corrupt deeds.  Allahabad HC judgement came as a shock to Mrs Gandhi and directly attacked her ulterior motives. She declared emergency. Her design to cut military leaders below knees paid off when none of them actually stood against unconstitutional declaration of emergency though three services chiefs politely refused to involve soldiers actively in enforcement of emergency. Later three services chiefs advised PM to lift emergency and call for elections. Mrs Gandhi then attacked independence of Judiciary and created a system of inserting loyalists as judges. Two pillars of democracy were attacked by Mrs Gandhi and  weakened. Nation has paid and still paying a heavy price for it. Justice system in the country has collapsed, professional military advice has no significance to political leadership leading them to commit more and more foreign policy and security blunders.

In any democracy due to sensitivity of moral of serving soldiers and risks of national security associated with it, military veterans take the lead as citizens soldiers to create a voice in favor of people. They help in creating public opinion which in return keeps politicians under check. In India unfortunately military veterans till 15 years back, have kept quite and lived an ignored and isolated lives. It is only now military veterans are creating visible voices using power of social media and connecting with people. It is a welcome and healthy sign for the democracy. Military Veterans have stakes of blood and life in democracy. Military veterans, as citizen soldiers shall therefore express independent issue based political voices with people without any bias to any political leader or political party. Military Veterans undertook OROP agitation for justice to soldiers to the streets. The agitation became visible and touched the nerves of people. BJP and Narendra Modi finding a political opportunity, created an hype of nationalism and promised to undo injustice done by Mrs Gandhi with soldiers.

7th Pay Commission was formed by UPA govt with its Chairman who had known disliking for military soldiers. Then army chief, Gen Bikarm Singh who is said to be related to then PM Manmohan Singh, as Chairman of Chiefs of staff committee, wrote a letter to Govt asking them not constitute a separate pay commission for military. He dumped the age old well justified demand of soldiers to have a separate pay commission. It was a betrayal of soldiers by their own chief. Driven by desire to further cut down soldiers and also hurt by soldiers agitation and views in social media, naturally 7th Pay Commission gave a very humiliating recommendations for the military soldiers. Taking lead from the word 'Parity' as given  in the terms of references of the govt letter which constituted 7th Pay Commission, the commission ignored the spirit of parity as established by Nehru Govt ( as explained above) and followed the line of ulterior motives of  Mrs Gandhi and further reduced the compensation package of soldiers.  OROP demand of soldiers has been extended to all others and their life time earning packages have been comparatively reduced further.

Soldiers had last hope from proclaimed nationalist govt of BJP and Narendra Modi. Three services chiefs wrote a letter to govt expressing discontentment. They also met PM to appraise him. retired military chiefs wrote a letter to PM which has not even been acknowledged by his office. Govt ignoring concerns of soldiers, went ahead and has notified humiliating and unjustified recommendations of the 7th Pay Commission with minor modifications in military pay matrix.

Conceptually why are govt notification on 7th Pay Commission for soldiers humiliating?

1. It doesn't respect distinct constitutional identity, role and status of the soldiers. When the MP is paid like MP, A judge like judge, an IAS like IAS then why a soldier is not paid like soldier?

2. It doesn't follow the concept of parity as established after much debate when the Indian Constitution was framed by the constituent assembly. The concept actually has been killed when in name of parity Life Time Earnings of military soldiers have been fixed lesser than a forest guard and constables of CAPF and Police and just above home guards.

3.  Compensation packages given doesn't match with the job profile of the military soldiers. The users of Nukes and state of art technologies to fight modern hybrid wars which can wipe of nations, are paid lesser than managers of forests who cant even extinguish forest fires without help of soldiers.

4. Primary role of military is to operate in international environment. Wars are fought between/ among nations. Thus the status and compensation packages to soldiers shall follow international best practices and protocols. Though (surprisingly and shockingly) India has not notified civil military parity list as required under Geneva convention for wars but it doesn't mean Indian govt will expose and humiliate their own soldiers in international environment and specially so in face of enemies. 7th Pay Commission has cited the US compensation packages. As per US Civil Military Parity notification under Geneva Convention a US Brigadier is clubbed with their highest pay grade of the civil servant. That means the highest pay grade of US civil servant is equal to HAG/ Apex Grade of IAS in India. That means a US Brigadier as per Geneva convention and US notification is equal in status of HAG/ APEX Grade of IAS officers of India? But than what is the status of Indian Brigadier? An IAS officer/ DM of 5 years of service boasts to be senior to a Brigadier? How will you maintain international protocols ensuring respect to your own Brigadier? Isn't it humiliating for military to operate in their primary roles? Why has India not notified Civil Military Parity List as required under Geneva convention to which India is a signatory? Pak can not be held accountable for violating Geneva Convention in case of Capt Kalia as India has not notified such list?

5. JCOs of India military are commissioned and gazetted officers and they are paid non gazetted salaries?  Technically and legally a JCO can be nominated as members of the Court of Inquiry?As commanders, NCOs of Indian army carry the authority to order fire and arrest like sub inspectors of Police but they are paid like Head Constables who have no legal powers? Are not these compensation packages to JCOs and NCO humiliating?

6. A Captain and equivalent  and above of Indian Military can under Summary General Court Martial not only give death sentences but also confirm and execute same without reference to any court or president. In CI operations an Inspector of Police or CAPF behave much superior to him? Isn't it humiliating?

Govt and babus may argue that they are well within their rights and authority to fix compensation packages of soldiers? Yes agreed but can they, while doing so, show total disregard to established HR principles accepted by govt while framing the constitution, constitutional status and job profile of the soldiers?   Worst can they do it without giving any reason or justification to flaunt unconstitutional authority and that is what is happening when Political leadership and Babus are giving no reasons and justifications and maintaining a mysterious, insulting and ignoring silence?

General VP Malik, Ex Army Chief was right to say on TV, that soldiers are being taken for granted. Their mature obedient silence keeping national security in mind is being misconstrued. Should a situation be allowed to explode by pushing soldiers beyond their thresholds of tolerance or patience? Very wrong signals are going from Govt to soldiers when PM  has all times to fly to Lahore to meet PM of Pakistan but has no ears to listen to his own military chiefs or time to meet military veterans in-spite of various requests?

Political Govt of BJP and Narendra Modi must act within established democratic norms under constitution and talk with reasons and justifications. Govt shall not be managed with whims and fancies of politicians and babus. Soldiers are most mature lots. They have been more loyal to democracy and constitution than politicians and babus who have bad records of corruption and one de-fecto coup of declaring emergency. Not trusting soldiers and ignoring them in a humiliating manners will surely add fuel to fire.

BJP in their manifesto did promise a Military Commission to manage all problems of soldiers, best way forward is:

1. Constitute Military Commission of two, jointly under an Ex Military Chief and a SC Judge with an IAS secretory to manage all problems of soldiers including their pay and packages and post service settlements.

2. Let Govt publish a Comparative Table of Life Time Earnings including pensions of all govt services and soldiers and then see how best can the established principle of parity at time of independence be put in effect and if the govt is not in the position to pay financial benefits then how best soldiers be compensated by other means ? The issue can then be managed by Military Commission.

3. Amend constitution to Include "Welfare and Resettlement of Soldiers" in concurrent list of the constitution thereby making central and state govts accountable for their welfare and  resettlement. 

4. Let newly constituted Military Commission draft out a law on "Service Conditions of Defense Forces" under the provisions of Constitution articles 309-313. Such laws already exist for all other govt services. Existing Defense Services Regulation doesn't cover all aspect of service conditions and also lack required statutory sanctions.   

Let us not play with national security. Fortunately soldiers are not asking moon and are talking reason. So why not talk reason and justification with them. Keeping discontentment simmering may prove to be highly disastrous. Soldiers are last resort of the nation and third pillar of the constitution. Let us not take any chance. Rising above egos, administer their status and compensation in just manner.

Let good sense prevail.  

As A Soldier I ask; Withdraw AFSPA - Politicians Will Never Do It? They are Fooling People

There has been an intense debate in country over withdrawal of Armed Forces Special Powers Act on ground of it being called draconian law which empowers army to search any premise and arrest any suspected person without warrant in areas declared disturbed by govt.

The law in legal perspectives, only extends executive powers of arrest of police to army empowering them to use military force. In other words the law facilitates use of military force by civil govt to assist police in execution of arrests in areas where security situations are disturbed. The law in no way tempers with rest of the legal procedures of civilian justice system.  The law is necessitated as police in these areas finds themselves unable to enforce law and order, therefore required military force is used to execute arrests to maintain order.

There is no doubt about AFSPA being harsh as it allows soldiers to use military force on their own civilian population. But it is also a fact that such harsh laws are required to deal with a situation which has gone out of control of civil authorities. The real problem is not in the application of law but failure of political and civilian authorities to take charge when the situation has become almost normal after counter insurgency operations by the military. It is this failure on part of political and civilian authority which actually prolongs military deployments in police duties to cause hardships not only to civilian population but soldiers too.

For example in Kashmir after almost decade plus of counter insurgency operations and fighting a Pak sponsored proxy war, soldiers could bring democracy back to give people an elected govt. Politicians failed to catch and build the momentum of normalcy created by soldiers. The situation erupted again indicating a loose hold of politicians on population. It is this disconnect between politicians and populations which creates disturbance where in army's deployment is prolonged.

It is a known fact that soldiers dislike being used in prolonged police duties in  counter insurgency operations as it affects their war preparedness.  During Kargil war soldiers did take some time to shed hangover of CI operations to come back on war fighting grid.

It is actually the politicians and civil administration which doesn't want army to go back to barracks. They lack confidence to take charge of the situation. Army being around gives them a safe and secure atmosphere wherein they keep engaging in corruption and loot. In insurgency infested areas as the central assistance in form of more funding goes up so is the corruption. The fact is In Kashmir corruption levels have gone up since the time insurgency erupted. In Assam and NE activities like coal, drugs, gold and wood smuggling has increased with insurgency. Terrorists, politicians and babus have ganged up in this joint loot. Police has stopped doing security duties as army is around. If the people are at discomfort due to ongoing military operations their anger increases when they see politicians and govt officials engaged in heightened corruption activities. Naturally they come to streets as they are being crushed from two sides.

But what is the fault of soldiers? It is not their job to do police duties. They are not trained to use minimum force. They always shoot to kill. Politicians and Govt have to make up their minds. If the situation has been restored to normalcy and it is a law and order problem then let soldiers go back to barracks and let civil authority  take charge. Expecting army to operate under civil criminal laws for law and order duties will be highly disastrous. Army is not police and shall not be converted into one or else who will fight national wars? Soldiers are also humans. They have capacity limitations and surely can not adapt to two roles same times which are 180 degree apart in nature and when you have CAPF then why expect soldiers to do their jobs? After all life time earnings of CAPF soldiers is more then twice than military soldiers. Military soldiers are surely not scavengers. They have a constitutionally well defined executive role and they shall concentrate on that.

Politicians are doing double talk and firing guns from shoulders of soldiers. To public it is said "Army is against lifting of AFSPA" and on other side Politicians don't want soldiers to go back to barracks as they feel insecure if it happens. Politicians want to use army soldiers like police constables and get them beaten from terrorists by amending AFSPA? Why? Why this insistence? Don't convert lions into sheep? The day that happens country's security structure will collapse. Let us not forget soldiers did desert posts in 62 war. If you pitch soldiers without protecting their pride and logistics, best of the armies will melt.

Let good sense prevail.

Pak Army Infiltration in Kargil ; Was it a Blunder by Political and Army Leadership?

Kargil conflict was a regional war, fought from May to Jul 1999 in highest treacherous mountains of Himalayas along northern part of LOC between India and Pakistan in Kashmir. It was an armed conflict which was fought by India to evict Pakistan's Army Infiltrators from Indian side of LOC. Whenever Kargil conflict is debated one question always comes up for discussion and that is "Was Indian Army lax in It's surveillance on LOC which allowed Pakistan Army to infiltrate and occupy dominating positions undetected?

Strategically Indian Army's always gave highest importance to Kargil mountains as it dominates  Sri Nagar Leh Highway. Then what actually went wrong that such dominating heights were vacated well before onset of freezing winters to be occupied by Pak Army? It was said that Indian Army vacated some defensive posts along LOC located at extremely high altitudes before freezing winters as it had no winter clothing and equipment to sustain troops in minus 40 degree temperatures. Apparently it sound logical as Pakistan Army also could not occupy these highest in such extreme winters but question still remains why did Indian Army vacate these defensive posts well before onset of extreme winters? It looks such practice was being implemented for few years which was noticed by Pak Army and exploited to infiltrate.

What were the compulsions of Indian army? It is a well known fact that flanks of Indian Army in Kashmir were turned by Pakistan fueling insurgency in Kashmir in form of a proxy war. Security situation in Kashmir Valley was at its worst compelling Indian Army to deplete troops deployed on LOC and Chinese LAC  and use them for counter insurgency operations but moot question still remains? Should a professional army deplete troops on main defensive line facing enemy for using them in rear areas for  counter insurgency operations? Was situation so desperate? Indian Military leadership surely is not that incompetent to have failed to make realistic assessments. In 1997, I had helped my Brigade Commander in drafting a review of threat assessment of Northern Command. I remember it clearly, we having identified Kargil as a potent infiltration route for Pak Army to make an attempt to capture few dominating heights along Sri Nagar Leh Highway and had recommended no depletion of defenses in this area.  In spite of such clear assessments still defensive deployment was denuded? Why?

We all know that Bajpai Govt under strong influence of then NSA; Brijesh Mishra, deteriorating security situation in J&K and under pressure from USA, was making a weak political pitch to open an dialogue with Pakistan. Bajpai visited Lahore and signed Lahore declaration with Pak PM; Nawaz Sharif and Kashmir dispute for first time after Shimla agreement, was brought as agenda for discussion. Bajpai - Nawaz meeting kicked a deceptive friendly cloud which was used as cover by Pak army to infiltrate in  Kargil to put a political question mark on validity of accepted LOC under Shimla Agreement. Kargil infiltration by Pak army had more political fall out than military. Nawaz Sharif contrary to the claims made, was fully on board in his military's misadventure.

With above political backdrop, was it Indian political leadership which made a wrong assessment of Pak Army not making any hostile move on LOC in such friendly atmosphere and Indian Army could move out more troops from LOC to use them for counter insurgency operations? It looks military leaders at highest levels also accepted the argument. It is a known fact that during peace time any change in active army deployment needs military and political approvals. It was therefore impossible for Indian army to have tempered with troops deployment on main defensive lines with out clear political directives.  Unfortunately Kargil Committee report has not reviewed political directives for CI operations in Kashmir when Bajpai was visiting Lahor. The question still remain unanswered? Being from army and having helped in drafting review of threat assessment of Northern Command, I can say that army was full aware of sensitivity of Kargil defenses and could have not denuded it unless there were political directives to do so? Let us not forget no top army commander has been punished for such lapse? Does it also strengthen the suspicion that  it was political leadership which was responsible to direct army to change its deployment on LOC?

Whatever may be the reason, fact is denuding main defensive line on LOC in Kargil was a serious lapse which gave Pak Army an opportunity to exploit against India to politically raise the pitch of Kashmir dispute. Political leadership of Bajpai may have blundered but Indian army leadership also can not escape the blame as they take oath of allegiance to defend constitution and if political leadership is wrong in any military decision it is duty of military leaders to stand against it within given constitutional space. Early redeployment of troops in Kargil was surely a blunder for which Indian army paid a heavy price.

Restructuring of Indian Military: An Unavoidable Choice for Modern Hybrid Wars

1.  Govt has recently ordered a study to propose restructuring of Indian Military to cut its flab to make it a more potent force. My Views in brief are given below.
2. Following key factors not known:
1. Geo Political Objective of Govt of India if given or not?
2. Terms of references?
3. With specific reference to India, following changes in geo-strategic scenarios, threats/ nature of conflicts within Indian sphere of interests, are discernible: 
1. Global power balance is transforming from USA led uni-polar world to bipolar world. Russia and China together are challenging uni-polarity. Early indicators of impending major conflicts are already visible. 
2. Cold war has returned with proxies fighting in battles in dynamic forward zones with much more use of sophisticated and intelligent weapon systems.
3. Major global powers and military blocks are gearing up for a long drawn technology intensive multi dimensional dynamic hybrid wars (these hybrid wars also include intense economic, trade and cyber conflicts). Military budgets of all major sub regional, regional and global powers are seeing unprecedented rises.  
4. India in present shape is highly vulnerable and not in position to create an independent power center. Sooner or later most likely will be sucked by a power block if an intense conflict breaks out.  
5. USA and NATO military powers are showing signs of retreat and fatigue. Power vacuum being created is giving birth to many non state regional players and many of them as proxies. Indian security is vulnerable if situation spins out of hands. 
6.  USA and NATO are showing hesitation in joining conflicts at three theater wars which Russian and Chinese strategy appears to pose. USA and NATO may not be able to win three theater wars unless regional powers like India & Pakistan join them.  For Asia Pacific Theater of war, Indian support to USA will tilt geo-strategic balance in their favor. Pakistan carries similar importance to USA for wars in West Asia and Central Asian Theater. 
7. Indian economic frontiers extent up to middle east which are presently under turmoil. In-spite of her desire, except few accomodative gestures, USA will not be able to ignore Pakistan which has been her major ally in the region. USA may use influence of Saudi Arabia to manage Pakistan and give  some space to India. In the given situation India may have to assert herself in the region to safeguard her economic frontiers. 
8. China, Pakistan and USA/ NATO have capabilities and interests to fuel insurgencies in fragile India if required. Emerging India trying to assert herself independently will be closely contested by these regional and global superpowers. Bipolarity in over next 50-60 years appears to be a reality till world settles to multi-polar world . Any attempt by India to come out of shadow to assert herself will draw her into conflicts. With growing economic frontiers India has no choice except to create a sphere of influence for herself and for same a very strong military is required.
9. Pakistan will remain hostile to India and no headway on Kashmir is likely  in next 30 years. Pakistan will use this dispute and her emerging relations with China as bargain with USA. Fact is, for India, it is better if Pakistan remains with USA than switching sides to China. Hostile China will prove to be costly for India if Pakistan allies with her. In given situation wherein Pakistan is too vulnerable due to her internal violent fault lines, her chances of switching sides to China to oppose USA appears to be bleak.  US Pak friendship strategically is more compulsive in nature than being natural. Pak loyalty to US will always remain suspect. 
10. China India dispute is one which can be easily resolved and It is more in Indian interests to do so. India must try securing her eastern flanks. Moving into intense phase of cold war with border dispute with China may be highly dangerous for Indian security. 
11. Indian ocean is heating up and witnessing major naval movements. 
12. USA/ NATO and Russia/ China as a strategy will like to fight first phase of major conflicts away from their physical borders in crowded Asian region. Crowded Asian Regions are likely to heat up with some eruptions of conflicts. Bangladesh, Nepal, NE and Indian Bengal are likely flash points. If these flash points are clubbed with RED Corridor and sensitive zone along Nepal, India naturally will be most vulnerable and affected.
13. Emergency plans of west to depopulate crowded Asian regions including India can not be ignored. 
14. Russia and China are luring countries like Germany, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to soften up their hotality towards them and intergrate with proposed economic development corridors.
4. Considering rapid changes in security scenarios, onset of Cold-war and emergence of  long drawn hybrid wars on battled field landscape, following functional capability parameters  should be inherent to the Indian Military restructuring: 
1.  Indian defense forces needs to be upgraded to become fully functional military capable of protecting economic frontiers going well beyond physical borders.
2. In spite of nuke deterrence low to medium intensity spectrum of hybrid wars clubbed with proxies pose real threats .
3. Indian military shall be capable of fighting a Hybrid War under shadow of nuclear threat over a protracted period in an integrated manner. The present concept of a short term war therefore needs to be reviewed.
4. Hybrid wars may have to shift focus from territory-centric to threat-centric. 
5. There may be need to orient troops for inter-oparability with military of friendly countries.
6. Military shall be capable of conducting a swift dynamic mobile operations in multiple theaters of operations  including sea. 
7. Military shall be able to achieve battle field transparency  in strategic depths.
8. Military shall be able to quickly group, regroup  and switch forces not only within tactical operation areas but also inter theater commands.
9. Military shall be able to carry out strategic penetrations and envelopment in 8 dimensions of strategic intelligence, behind enemy lines including population, space, air, land, sea including sea to land ops, cyber and  electronic space to establish superior military situation to get favorable political outcomes .  
10. Military shall be capable to send at least one expeditionary force to defend economic frontiers..
11. Military shall always maintain technological superiority over potential adversaries. Superior technological intervention is an essential ingredient for modern wars to be won.
12. Military shall be able to launch counter offensive swiftly after absorbing shock of nuke strikes and create a favorable military situation. 
13. Military logistics shall be able to support military operations adopting to an integrated dynamic grid and in exclusive integrated manner to expeditionary force.
14. Nation needs to evolve a war mobilizations plans for short- medium and long term national wars including managing foreign sponsored  insurgencies within. 
15. Defense Industrial manufacturing and logistics bases needs to be developed on war footing to curtail foreign dependencies for all critical supplies. . 
16. Indian military shall be capable to manage 3-4 possible insurgencies and 2-3 front hybrid wars in short, medium and long term time perceptive.
17. At Doctrinal level Military needs to switch from present "strategy of creating favorable military situation in a short war for political leadership to speak from some strength" to "capable of fighting a long term hybrid over 15-20 years to exhaust adversary to bring a favorable political or economical settlement of a dispute or objective". 
18. Structure military strength in manner so that is capable of meeting
1. Immediate and short term and medium term threats by creating a standing military strength with suitable reserves to manage one front short war with Pakistan, management of effective aggressive defensive postures on eastern front, effective sea surveillance of Indian Ocean with potent sea denial capabilities close to coasts  with capabilities to manage eruption of 2-3 insurgencies within. Such force shall be capable of meeting 1-2 short term high intensity battles at 2-3 operation zones. 
2. For long term threat, increase military capabilities by mobilizations of reserve  resources to fight 2 front wars over 2-3 years ( China and Pakistan both). Create TAs and mothballed units which could be mobilized in 3-4  months time frame to increase strength of army to meet the threat. Logistics lines should accordingly be structured.
3. Capable of sending one expeditionary force to protect national economic frontiers wit or without friendly forces. 
19. Create supporting regulatory framework for fighting wars in Internal Security mode. AFSPA is an incomplete law without any provisions for investigations, prosecutions and quick judicial trials. Defence of India Act and Rules therefore, shall be suitably modified to employ military in Internal Security. 
5.  With above scenario and assumptions in reference to military capabilities in mind and also need of economy of efforts, restructuring focus in following areas are envisaged
1. Create a integrated national command center (static and mobile) capable of surviving nuclear hits under PM with staff drawn from all three services, Intelligence agencies, key ministries including Finance, DRDO and bureaucracy.  Operation of such command center be managed by military. 
2. Create a post of national military adviser/ CDS with a HQ, who shall be responsible for developing war doctrines, advise Govt on all affairs of Military and also conduct military diplomacy.  a Police officer or career diplomat as NSA is not suitable for this job due to obvious reasons. It will be in addition to NSA. 
3. Integrate MOD and Ministry of Foreign Affairs staffed with defense officers. Let us not forget military is a tool of foreign policy of a nation. Foreign Ministry shall not work in isolation. Military diplomacy provides more options to political diplomacy and it shall work in tandem and make best use of military strengths. 
4.  Operationally Integrate Army, Air Force and Naval HQ under one umbrella under CDS from national command center down to Corps/ operations levels keeping training and administration HQ separate under respective Chiefs.
5.  All distinct operational command of three services be abolished and merged  into theater commands like under
1. One Theater Command for sea operations against Pakistan including land forces stationed in coastal areas of Gujrat. 
2. One Theater Command for desert and plains of Rajasthan and Punjab for mob operations. All forces under this command be mechanized and shall be capable to undertake strategic maneuvers under nuke threat. .
3. One Theater command for mountainous regions of J&K against Pakistan.
4. One Theater command In Mountainous regions of J&K, HP and UP against China
5. One Theater command for NE.
6. One Theater command for Bay of Bengal including coast lines with Bangladesh.
7. One Theater command for Southern coast.
8. One expeditionary force (Marines) 
9. One special operations force including air borne and air landing operations. 
10. One cyber warfare force
11. One EW & Space force.
12. One Strategic Nuclear Command
13. One Internal security command. All Area HQ be abolished. Create one sub area for each state only for civil liaison and ad to civil  authority with no logistics and administrative tasks. IS Command shall also provide leadership cover to PMF forces. All Disaster Management, Ad to Civil Authority and internal military intelligence be part of responsibility of this command. 
14. Four Training Commands one for joint training and three for for respective services.
15. Three integrated Op Logistic Commands for Western, Eastern and Southern fronts. All station HQ and logistics elements to work under logistics command. 
16. Three Administrative Commands for three respective services. . 
17. All Commands be commanded by 4 star Generals and forces by a Lt Gen.
18. Have an independent directorate under MOD to carry put operational audit of military. Annual report of such audit shall be submitted to Parliament, Govt, CDS and Respective Services Chiefs.
6. Under respective commands, have integrated operational Corps HQs with Composite Task forces. Abolish Div HQ and have Bde HQ with enhances capabilities named as Composite Task Force directly under Corp HQ. Corps HQ be commanded by Lt Gen and Composite Task forces be commanded by a Maj Gens. 
7. Only in areas where no Corps sized force is required have Integrated Div HQs commanded by Maj Gen.
8. Abolish all logistics elements as integrated with HQ Corps, Divs and Bde now and create a system of attachment of all op units with elements  of integrated op logistics command. It will create better logistics management and cut down flab. 
9. All forces like BSF, ITBP etc for border management, CI duties and war be under command military or Internal Security Command as the case may be. Integrated battle in forward zone is very critical to detect, delay and discern enemy intentions. PMF led by IPS officers will fail to do such task if not integrated with military tactical plans. Therefore these forces be carved out of army persons retiring young. IPS be withdrawn from these forces. Internal Security Command should coordinate entire operations and can be placed under home ministry. This will bring internal security and ad to civil authority tasks under home ministry and will yield better results. As 4 Star General commanding IS Command be part of National Command Center, it will create better synergy during war and peace.  This measure itself will cut heavy national pension cost.   
10. Another big debate is that shall Infantry Bns have 3 assault companies or 4 assault companies? If the fighting capabilities, firepower, weapon, transport and equipment profile of Inf Bn is enhanced as per NATO profile than organisation can opt for three assault companies, one spl ops company and one fire support company. One assault company and administrative company can be reduced. Remember now composite task force commanded by a Maj Gen has replaced Bde HQs and it has threat centric compsit forces under it. Therefore in a given sector net fire power actually gets enhanced bringing more punch, reserves and reduces logistics flab. 
11. Structure of composite task forces working directly under Corps HQ shall be op and threat specific and will depend sector to sector.
12. As Military operates in international space there is need to create manpower profile as per international protocols. There are certain aberrations which has set in our defense forces like
1. Rifle companies in most professional armies are commanded by Captains/ Majors and in our case these are commanded by Lt Col. It creates a very awkward situation and has no justification in terms of operational needs and international protocols. 
2. Brigadier in most armies are equated with top most ech of civil bureaucracy.  Like in USA, a Brigadier is equated with SEO level civil servants. SEO level civil servants of USA are, in terms of protocol equal to HAG and Apex Grade of IAS of India. So a Brigadier of US army is actually as per international protocol equivalent to HAG and Apex Grade IAS officer of Indian army but shockingly our own Brigadier is not treated at par with them. This creates an anomaly which has serious repercussions in war while treating prisoners of war. 
3. In most armies Bn are commanded by selection grade Lt Col whereas in our army these are commanded by Colonel. Actually in operational terms Col and Brigadiers are stroke ranks. Col in most armies are used for key staff appointments. Indian must revert to Lt Col commanding Bns. It is correct in terms of operational needs and also international protocols. 
4. JCO is a gazetted rank. Shockingly they are paid as non gazetted officers. There is a need to elevate the status of JCOs equivalent to class B gazetted officers and they shall be treated as normal commissioned officers may be silver badges and be member of officers messes. By law NCOs of army exercise powers of highest levels of Non gazetted ranks. Present JCOs mess shall be converted as NCOs mess. NCO shall be paid as equal to SUB inspector of police. Under AFSPA or military laws in relation to powers of arrest, powers of NCOs to arrest and order fire are same and more than Sub Inspector of Police.
13. Pay, pensions, status, resettlement, family welfare and welfare of soldiers has been a sore point which directly relates to the moral of troops. India can not linger on this contentious issue making soldiers to agitate. Following shall be done:
1. Constitute a standing military commission to manage all subject issues. 
2. Bring relevant acts and rules for service conditions of soldiers as envisaged in constitution.  All other govt services have such regulatory framework except military soldiers. Absence of such laws, promote adhocism and lead to unnecessary litigation. Such bill will define words like "Commissioned Officer" and also provide framework for constitution of Military Commission. 
3. In relation to pay and pension the policy framework provided by Nehru Govt just after independence to create a relationship with civil compensation, shall be followed. It may be suitably modified adhering to best practices of average salary indexes based on length of service and comprehensive career compensations of soldiers not being less than civilian.   
14. A separate bill shall also define method of execution of Commanding Authority by Supreme Cdr of Defense Forces.  Right now though constitution makes him the supreme commander but a legal framework is missing to define same.
6. Let us not forget our defense forces are still working on WWII model and need up-gradation to make it a modern potent force which are highly agile and cost effective and yet deliver a death punch.  The above analysis is based on information as available in open source media. Actual strength can only be worked out by those who are privy to threat assessments. Fact is nation needs a cost effective defense mechanism which gives best value for money and nation must work for it.  Restructuring Indian Military thus is an unavoidable choice to meet the face of modern hybrid wars. Fear of coup has been bit too much overplayed by bureaucracy to scare politicians due to obvious reasons. Let us not forget the soldiers have track records to prove their commitments to their oaths and loyalty to constitution and democracy. Such fears shall not prevent creation of a professional military which can support the extension of justified economic and political sphere of the nation. Military is not only protectorate of physical borders, but it is also an essential enabler of growth of a trillion dollar economic.  

Temple Industry In India; Largest Business Sector

India is a vast country having 120 crores people residing in her 640000 villages, 5000 small cities and 400 big cities. Hindus are almost 80% of the population and 83 crores in numbers. Though Hindu scripture do not endorse statute worship but majority of them have by and large practiced it along with many rituals managed exclusively by Brahman Priests.

Though correct numbers of temples are not available, but as per one assessments there are almost 800000 temples spread all across India. These temples form hub of many ritualistic activities and sustain an Industry in itself. As per one assessment a Hindu generally spends 2% of his income as donations to temples and various rituals as an average over his entire life span. Almost Rs 60000 crores revenue per year is generated by the Temple Industry. In addition to these cash flows, large amount of unaccounted gold, fixed deposits and land are held by these temples.

As per one audit report of 4 richest temples in India, 20 lakhs kg gold is held by these temples which is 40 times more than the gold reserves of Govt of India. Annual income of richest temples of India is 2260 crores per year. If the assets of these four temples are used for development works than each village can be connected with road and each Indian can be given a house.

If four temples can hold so much of wealth, than properties, cash deposits and gold held by 800000 temple in India is unimaginable and could be up to 60000000 Crores. No wonder India has always been such an attractive target for invaders.

If the assets are taken into consider than Temple Industry is the largest business sector in India. This sector pays no taxes to the govt and sustains a parallel economy of black money.

As per one assessments, the entire Temple Industry is managed by 10000000 Brahmans Priests which is roughly 20% of the total population of 50000000 Crores Brahmans in India. No wonder only 13% of Brahmans are poor against national average of 21%.

Temple Industry in India doesn't undertake significant charity works and against teachings of tenants of Hinduism, thrives on spreading fear and ignorance among population.  The unaccounted money in hands of Brahmans Priests also sustains political activities in the country supporting lobbies to maintain control over national political power.

2000 years old Manu Smriti imposed reservation system is still deeply embedded in society and gives maximum advantage to Brahman Priests with no gainful returns to society. The very stable revenues stream in hands of these Brahman Priests also supports their rise in politics, education, business and R&D thus making them one of the most influential and dominating castes of India. Though Brahmans form less then 5% of the total population but they have comparatively maximum share in Govt and Private Sector Jobs and business.

In modern India when caste conflicts are on rise, such untapped revenue streams which do not contribute in nation building needs to be taken in account and shall be used for growth of society at large.

Dismantle Manu Smiriti Based Socio Economic Order of Reservation

Competition for resources is a natural human course. Since ancient times, these competitions have been triggering wars. Modern times are no exceptions.  In present Indian scenario, early indicators for these desperate competitions triggering caste wars are so visible. More and more castes are demanding job reservations for their right economic stakes. India somehow has failed to dismantle the caste system based socio-economic order created in ancient times and coded so rigidly in Manu Smriti.

  

Historically, Manu Smriti in ancient time was written to put an order of reservation for management of resources and is deeply embedded in socio-eco structure. It was based on four varna system, where in the most easiest source of money with best perks were reserved for Brahmans. Manu Smriti also ensured best safety for Brahmans as it dictated that killing a Brahman is a sin. Temple industry today is one of the largest business activity controlled by Brahmans. It sustains black money and doesn't pay any tax. It is multi billion dollar industry in hands of only Brahmans. Demand for Ram Temple is more related to expanding this business empire then actually strengthening religion. Tool of Hindutwa is more used by Brahman controlled political lobbies to maintain their grip on the political power than bringing any real values to people. 

India is country of strange economic dispositions and disparities. Business communities who are less then 10% of total population control 90% cash flows of the country. Does it mean that people of other caste are not capable enough to do business? That is not that case, but yes Manusmriti created social economic order plays a key role in deciding their preference for profession and creates barriers like guilds of business communities protect their invisible territories and not allowing other castes to enter or do business on same beneficial or profitable terms. Banks give more preference to people of business communities and Brahmans for extending financial support compare to Martial Castes or Dalits.

Martial Castes who are traditionally farmers, had fixed political stakes during British period and were most influential. With abolition of princely states, Zamindaris and shrinking of land holding Martial Castes which once had dominating political influence, have been economically marginalized in independent India and are at the verge of breaking point. Soldiers and Farmers are on street demanding better salaries, better prices of their products and job reservations.  

Dalits who were once at receiving end as slaves in ancient India continue to face inhuman conditions and treatment. At time of independence, they were given political reservation in addition to job reservation. But the system in place treats them more like a vote bank than really bringing any change in their social economic conditions. 

Strangely over a period of time, laws in India have evolved with caste preferences, like Brahmans who are considered holy are not required to pay any tax on donations in temple or on their income from rituals. Similarly laws favor business over agriculture.  

Manu Smriti created caste based socio-eco order of reservation, is still playing key roles in distribution of economic resources in the country. Unequal distribution of wealth is creating discontentment. Only job reservation and that too in govt, will not solve the problem there is need to dismantle Manu Smriti created caste based order of reservation which has created invisible territories and fixed channels of circulation of wealth. Though no caste based figure are available in India about the banking loans, but a glance over the lists of defaulters who have created billion of dollars of NPA assets suggest caste based biases. It appears govt has been fooling people by job reservation whereas real money circulation is taking place somewhere else.

A comprehensive plan therefore needs to be undertaken over next 30-40 years to break this exclusiveness to create integrated  inclusiveness. More than job reservations, India needs skill development supported by  banking to ensure fair circulation of money through people of all strata of society including those living in rural areas. There is need to create support system by infusing cash flows through remote and backward economic channels to create value. Economic empowerment is more important than job reservation to create an inclusive growth. But key question is, will economic empowerment happen without political empowerment? As political governance in India has remained largely in the hands of high caste lobby, there is a huge trust deficient among masses which is adding into more frustration and social tensions.