Indian Army: News & Discussion

rajatmisra · Post by **rajatmisra** » 22 Jan 2012 20:56

To someone from outside, it seems clear that the Army must accept blame for the various issues. If a succession plan is being drawn to favour an undeserving candidate, it is being done by someone from within. The MS branch is a part of the force as well. Issue is that how could so called incompetent people reach the top levels of Lt Gen and Generals. Isn't there something fundamentally wrong if for posts for which only 3 out of 1000 officers rise, are filled up with such people?

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 22 Jan 2012 21:07

I was thinking exactly the same thing. Hope a M1A2 accidentally runs over a tin can-90 and squashes it like a bug.

Boreas · Post by **Boreas** » 22 Jan 2012 21:21

rajatmisra wrote:To someone from outside, it seems clear that the Army must accept blame for the various issues. If a succession plan is being drawn to favour an undeserving candidate, it is being done by someone from within. The MS branch is a part of the force as well. Issue is that how could so called incompetent people reach the top levels of Lt Gen and Generals. Isn't there something fundamentally wrong if for posts for which only 3 out of 1000 officers rise, are filled up with such people?

Somethings are always fundamentally wrong. In a fair world Arvind Kejriwal would have been PM and Rahul Gandhi would have been travelling in sleeper coaches.

Appointments are based less on merit and more on compatibility with the ruling party.

anchal · Post by **anchal** » 22 Jan 2012 21:47

Anyone read the shitty article on Firstpost by Bekaar Patel? The article is too debased to be posted anywhere

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 22 Jan 2012 21:58

DNA has article on COAS's school official who filled the form. He says that VKS was confused abt his birth year, hence they filled 1950. Subsequently, his fathers causalities record was taken from the battalion. It stated 1951 and his school leaving certificate was made stating the year 1951.

Has this been discussed before?

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 22 Jan 2012 22:33

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_teacher-backs-army-chiefs-claim_1640744

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 22 Jan 2012 22:41

How come some posters are ALWAYS on the wrong side, irrespective of the discussion?

Always, like clock work.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jan 2012 00:18

rajatmisra wrote:To someone from outside, it seems clear that the Army must accept blame for the various issues. If a succession plan is being drawn to favour an undeserving candidate, it is being done by someone from within. The MS branch is a part of the force as well. Issue is that how could so called incompetent people reach the top levels of Lt Gen and Generals. Isn't there something fundamentally wrong if for posts for which only 3 out of 1000 officers rise, are filled up with such people?

Rajat, there are two aspects to the conduct of officers here. One, the professional competence as far as matters military are concerned. The selection boards are pretty fair in this regard and act as a filter. All the officers who make it to the top would have undergone the pre-requisite courses and secured the neccessary grading. The command and staff (C&S) postings would have been such that these soldiers would have been exposed to most critical stuff - they would have picked up/promoted to these C&S postings itself based on their track record earlier. For example, more often than not, you can expect the COAS to have commanded one of the Strike Corps or earlier as Major General a RAPID/Armored Division or critical positions (15 Corps for example). So, rest assured, these stuff are take care off. Yes, there still might be an issue once in a while but then, nothing is perfect.

Coming to second part - how the soldiers decide to conduct themselves is completely different ball game. For example, IMO, it was JJ Singh who was the main culprit in the whole episode. DK used the DOB issue for his own interest (save MS Avadesh Prakash in Sukhna land scam). Inspite of being professionaly competent, these people used politics/cronyism/sycophancy to further their interests. Problem occurs when people look beyond the interest of organization and try to fill their coffers/make life better for themselves. That is where an organization like IA (or Services) with its sets of strict rules and regulations and ethos of confirming to hierarchy suffer the most. The structure these people put in place self-perpetuates and leads to erosion of professionalism.Last time something like this happened we had 1962.This is why VKS was and is very important - to remove such structure and nip the cancer in the bud.

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 23 Jan 2012 00:53

Ideally the debate should be of validity of established processes and the tests of scrutiny to keep the administrators on 'straight and narrow'.

This is now being turned into a squabble internal to IA. Whose 'succession plan' is it? IA or GOI.

If at one time an officer from a certain background can be superseded over another because the person is better 'suited' in GOI's estimation over a senior, then for the same reason, at another time, an officer from that background can also be promoted superseding another. If 'suitability' is the criteria then GOI should be duty bound in selecting the suitable officer, superseding a senior officer, when there is a need. That should not be taken away from GOI. What might be needed to be displayed are propriety and a little disowning of cliques, if any. Little men don't build great nations.

If boards for 2-3 stars are violating guidelines and not being caught, how can GOI wash its hands off the blame? Boards were re-convened in the dark, were they? By virtue of 'civilian supremacy' there is supposed to be 'Oversight'. Where is it now? (maybe there might be a need to reconvene in less than 90 days in chaged circumstances, but did they change and what were they?)

I do not think you can become a 2-3 star general, playing marbles. What we are talking about are tight races and among type A personalities. Some discord is to be expected. I won't call it a rot.

For the same reason, I do not expect that anyone could make VKS give his acceptance under duress. I would imagine certain verbal assurances must have been given to him which allowed him to have some hopes of remedial action.

In the end, the way I see it there will be next Chief. The men under his command will still have a job to do. He needs their confidence and they expect leadership from him, why taint it with discord?

Rammna sir has brought out CMR. Maybe CMR needs to be brought to the Indian vocabulary so that the subject can be overhauled.

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 23 Jan 2012 00:58

^^ @Rohit
I find two points amiss in the above second part.
One, the 'main culprit' blame can not be put on one individual Gen JJSingh or another in uniform. Gen JJSingh or whosoever would not have done what was done, than at the behest of his/their Political Masters(PM)
Two, the consideration for Gen DKapoor to fix VKS could not have been what you said, since fixing of VKS's DoB predates VKS becoming Eastern Army Commander.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jan 2012 01:08

Nelson - at this moment, I have no data point to support the assertion that JJ fixed the succession plan at the behest of some political master. The fact the BKS is relative of MMS is being used in round-about way to back this up. Even if someone has chaiwalah info on this, I am all ears. On the contrary, what is being said is that JJ and BKS are somehow close to each other (may freinds having served together). Coming to DK and then MS Avadesh Prakash and VKS, well, the issue was raised just to put VKS at unease. The Sukhna Land Scam erupted in public much later - a lot had happened before it reached the press. IMO, Lt. General Rath was the casualty of battle between DK+MS on one side and VKS on another. But I fully agree that whatever JJ and DK did could not have happened w/o the babus knowing it. And the fact that they did nothing - and are now doing everything against VKS - clearly goes to show that favors were given and taken between COAS's office and MOD big-wigs.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 23 Jan 2012 01:09

Sanku wrote:How come some posters are ALWAYS on the wrong side, irrespective of the discussion?

Always, like clock work.

Don't be so harsh on yourself Sanku, you have been right before.

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 23 Jan 2012 02:06

Surya wrote:Outlook remains fairly neutral - shocker

The repercussions of the Punjabi cat fight at the top echelons continues.

Regret that a decade ago I used to be in awe of JJ Singh. sigh....

I'm not sure. It's neutral only so far as it establishes some credibility for propaganda. Amarinder Singh after all came out in support of the Chief. My guess it they're trying to create a split in the Army. That plus with Punjab going to polls they probably want to see if they can mitigate the damage it'll cause the Cong. Save for a few hon'ble peoeple our media is a joke. Political lackeys.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 23 Jan 2012 02:38

Not sure if this was posted before

The author is ex CO 1 Para ( SF)

RESET THE POLITICAL- MILITARY RELATIONSHIP

By Arjun Katoch

The controversy regarding the date of birth of Army Chief General VK
Singh , has resulted in an absolutely unprecedented situation where
the Army Chief has taken the Government to court. This is deeply
embarrassing to the Government. It is also odd that a Government that
would trust an individual with the defence of the nation and command
of a 1.3 million man Army would not believe him when he tells them his
date of birth ! However, this is just a symptom of the real underlying
cause which is a dysfunctional political military relationship
characterized by the absence of dialogue between the Armed Forces and
the political class. This attitude of the Government is perilous for
the country for it ignores one of the foundations of national power.
While writing in the Nov/Dec 2011 issue of ‘ Foreign Affairs’,
MacDonald and Parent discussing American retrenchment in the world
reiterated the truism that ‘ Power is multifaceted and difficult to
measure, but the metrics that matter most over the long term are a
country’s military capability and economic strength.” In India,
aspiring to global player status, and caught in a Sino- Pakistan
pincer, little thought has been given by the political class to
developing modern military capability over a long term period and very
few, if any, politicians have any interest in strategy or a
understanding of the Armed Forces and their capabilities and are
knowledgeable about military matters.
All advice is rendered to politicians by an intervening layer of
bureaucrats in the Defence Ministry, with no military experience, who
has turf as their primary motivating factor. Two examples illustrate
this military - political disconnect. Firstly, there is no senior
advisor of the rank of Lieutenant General or equivalent located with
the Foreign and Home Minister to advise on the military implications
of issues they consider. After all, military diplomacy is a tool
employed by all major countries in international relations and the
Armed Forces are the ultimate guarantors of internal security and
instrument of national disaster response. Perhaps then the MEA would
not be so sanguine when there are 50 incursions of Chinese troops into
Indian territory in three months as reported in India Today in
September. Secondly, this Government has reduced the selection of an
Army, Air Force or Navy Chief to a Departmental and biological
function based on the date of birth thus eliminating any consideration
of merit in the process. It is not as if others have not noticed.
Stephen Cohen has very clearly identified this political military
disconnect as the major deficiency in the Indian national security
scenario in his book aptly titled ‘Arming without Aiming’.

On the critical issue of Armed Forces respect and morale, the
Government seems even more out of step with national sentiment. We had
a situation recently where the Spokesperson in the ruling National
Congress in J & K, Mustafa Kamal, made the preposterous allegations
that the Army engineered a spate of terrorist incidents in the Kashmir
valley because it wanted to influence a debate on the AFSPA and the
Minister of Defence did not utter a word in defence of the Army he is
supposed to be in charge of. We have a Ministry of Defence that gives
views on important issues relating to national security that are
contrary to the advice of the Armed Forces without informing them.
This is a Defence Ministry that can be staffed by officers from the
IAS, IFS, Police, Customs, and Forest Service with no military
experience of any kind but bars officers from the Armed Forces from
its staff. We have a Police memorial coming up in Central Delhi and
no discussion of a War Memorial in a country that has fought numerous
wars where thousands of soldiers have sacrificed their lives and
limbs! By most indicators, relations between the Armed Forces and
the Ministry of Defence are currently the most adversarial since
Krishna Menon was the Defence Minister in 1962…. and we all know where
that led us to, even without an ‘all weather ‘ China Pakistan
friendship.

16 Dec 2011 was the 40th Anniversary of the greatest military victory
of Independent India marking the surrender of the Pakistani Army in
Dhaka. The campaign was also the most significant military victory of
indigenous Indian Arms in the last 1000 years and one of the classic
post World War campaigns of military history, which was studied around
the world. In any other country there would have been events honouring
the servicemen who achieved that military victory and memorials to it.
However, there was no sign of a celebration in Delhi. It was almost as
if the Government was embarrassed to discuss and acknowledge military
power.
We have the Ministry of Defence on the verge of spending Rs 42,000
crores to buy 124 MRCA fighter aircraft without any real debate on
whether this money is better spent on other more relevant war fighting
technologies and capabilities such as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)
like the Predator which are far, far cheaper and much more effective.
Many experts feel that manned fighter aircraft are not worth investing
in any more as unmanned armed ‘drones’ with modern technology are fast
arriving at a stage where they can outmaneuver and out gun manned
fighters. Has anyone challenged the Air Force’s request or compared it
to putting in 42,000 crores into drones, naval assets, missiles,
attack helicopters and Special Forces? After all, the Defence budget
is not unlimited and should be spent most cost effectively.
We have procurement of major equipment such as Field Guns and
helicopters critical for maintaining operational capabilities at a
standstill for years because our Defence Ministry does not seem to see
the need for any urgency in the matter. We have the Border Roads
Organization hamstrung in the construction of strategic roads along
the Chinese border because no one in the Defence Ministry is bothered
to support this project whereas the same BRO constructed the 215 km
long Delaram- Zaranj road in insecure Afghanistan in record time.
To rectify this, we need to reset the whole spectrum of the political
-military interface so that military advice is available to the
political leadership unfiltered by the bureaucracy. Here are five
measures that should be taken. First, immediately integrate the Armed
Forces into the Ministry of Defence by permitting Armed Forces
officers to serve in any post in the Ministry. This will get some
badly needed practical and professional military experience into the
Ministry. Second, ensure that either the National Security Advisor or
the Deputy National Security Advisor is always an individual with
extensive military experience. Third, establish a Military Advisors
cell within the Ministries of External Affairs and Home headed by a
Lieutenant General and reporting directly to the Minister that can
advise him or her on the military implications of any policy issue
relating to their Ministry. Fourth, establish a panel consisting of
the PM, Minister of Defence and Leader of the Opposition to select a
Service Chief on merit from amongst serving officers of the rank of
Lieutenant Generals and equivalent. Last but not the least, display
some national gratitude towards all the soldiers, sailor and airmen
who have lost their lives in Indian wars after Independence and create
a war memorial in the India Gate area aesthetically designed through
an open architectural competition. All these suggested measures are
basic common sense and good governance measures that can easily be
undertaken by Government administratively and do not even touch the
more major and politically sensitive issues of integration of the
three Armed Forces and appointing a Chief of Defence Staff. Only a
major reset in the political military relationship can ensure that
India utilizes optimally its military potential as one of the major
metrics of national power.

(The author is a former Chief of the Civil - Military Coordination
Section of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs)

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 23 Jan 2012 03:00

Media and BRF must be careful to not damage raputation of serving or retired generals who are unable to defend themselves due to sevice rules. DK and his cronies are fair game as their crimes are proven and some of them are convicted but JJ singh and Bikram Singh may be innocent, we do not know of their coulpability, except for media insinuation.

Vested interests, that want MMS to go or congress govt to fall may use this Sikh connection to destroy reputation and h&d of officers that were earned over a lifetime.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 23 Jan 2012 04:19

Katare wrote:Media and BRF must be careful to not damage raputation of serving or retired generals who are unable to defend themselves due to sevice rules. DK and his cronies are fair game as their crimes are proven and some of them are convicted but JJ singh and Bikram Singh may be innocent, we do not know of their coulpability, except for media insinuation.

Vested interests, that want MMS to go or congress govt to fall may use this Sikh connection to destroy reputation and h&d of officers that were earned over a lifetime.

Katare-ji, do correct me if I've got the perception wrong, but it appears that your concern about "media damaging the reputation of serving or retired generals" has manifested itself after the Outlook story that gives a very good explanation for exactly why VKS was being pressured to accept 1950. I did not gauge your concern about the "media damaging the reputation of serving or retired generals" after the India Today "Self before Service" story. Thoda sa consistency bhi hona chahiye.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 23 Jan 2012 07:11

well pandyan its civil servants and the devious vassals at MS branch

anyway talking to some chaiwallahs it seems two diff tracks as far as JJ and DK are concerned (rohit hear this)

JJ was trying to make sure that UPA got a compliant chief(quid pro quo??) - so folks here who made that statement seem to be right (poor Arora who was a honest competent guy got shafted.

DK was a crook(adarsh and sukna) whose protege Avadesh got hit by VK and hence decided to muck this up

so two seperate motives seem to have confluenced

VKS was extremely lucky to have survived this far for being a honest guy. Poor Arora seem to have suffered more.

In fact the chaiwallah I spoke to feels the last person who suffered this much injustice was Kapil Vij

Kapil · Post by **Kapil** » 23 Jan 2012 08:25

I propose an open source based series of pen portraits of our 2 star and above officers.It's high time somebody did this .it's useful when one has to read up about people under discussion.
I will even suggest a series of biographies of 3 stars and service chiefs since 1980.anyone up for it ?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 23 Jan 2012 09:25

Kalam pays tributes at IPKF memorial in Sri Lanka

For the first time since a memorial for the Indian Peace Keeping Force was established on the outskirts of Colombo, a former Commander-in-Chief of the Indian armed forces visited it on Sunday.

“Oh defenders of my nation, you cross seas to defend nations. You are great sons of my land. We pray for you, brave hearts,” the former President, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, wrote in the visitors' book at the memorial.

Mr. Kalam arrived at the memorial at 9.20 a.m. with Indian High Commissioner Ashok K. Kantha. He paid floral tributes and spent some time going around the memorial, reading the names of the 1,200 soldiers who laid down their lives fighting a war to enforce the India-Sri Lanka accord of 1987. The forces were inducted in July 1987 and the last troops left Sri Lanka in March 1990.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jan 2012 09:47

Surya wrote:well pandyan its civil servants and the devious vassals at MS branch

anyway talking to some chaiwallahs it seems two diff tracks as far as JJ and DK are concerned (rohit hear this)

JJ was trying to make sure that UPA got a compliant chief(quid pro quo??) - so folks here who made that statement seem to be right (poor Arora who was a honest competent guy got shafted.

DK was a crook(adarsh and sukna) whose protege Avadesh got hit by VK and hence decided to muck this up

so two seperate motives seem to have confluenced

VKS was extremely lucky to have survived this far for being a honest guy. Poor Arora seem to have suffered more.

In fact the chaiwallah I spoke to feels the last person who suffered this much injustice was Kapil Vij

Pretty much in line with my thinking on the subject. On the JJ issue, if you remember, he was the first one to speak against the Siachen settlement and had asked for the demarcation on ground. It was IA's opposition which seems to have scuttled any settlement then. So, if JJ was a pliant chief, why did he do so? My guess is that he was being his master's voice....that GOI uses IA as a canard when it wants to speak in multiple voices and stall an engagement.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jan 2012 09:56

Surya, I happen to have acquantence with a gentleman who is VKS's batchmate from NDA. As per him, VKS has had to literally fight some issue or another at each stage of promotion. And people considered him lucky to have made it to full Colonel. But he is considered an absolute upright officer and fighter to the core who has throughout his career refused to take nonsense. In fact, his batch, 36 NDA, was considered as trouble maker with characters who never hesitated to take on the system, right from NDA days. But many of them did make it senior rank across the services.

sum · Post by **sum** » 23 Jan 2012 12:14

Kalam pays tributes at IPKF memorial

For the first time since a memorial for the Indian Peace Keeping Force was established on the outskirts of Colombo, a former Commander-in-Chief of the Indian armed forces visited it on Sunday.

“Oh defenders of my nation, you cross seas to defend nations. You are great sons of my land. We pray for you, brave hearts,” the former President, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, wrote in the visitors' book at the memorial.

Mr. Kalam arrived at the memorial at 9.20 a.m. with Indian High Commissioner Ashok K. Kantha. He paid floral tributes and spent some time going around the memorial, reading the names of the 1,200 soldiers who laid down their lives fighting a war to enforce the India-Sri Lanka accord of 1987. The forces were inducted in July 1987 and the last troops left Sri Lanka in March 1990.

This man's stature keeps growing in my eyes as each day passes!!

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 23 Jan 2012 12:22

pandyan wrote:^^ So? Whats the point?

I have been pointless even before with simply reporting.

rajrang · Post by **rajrang** » 23 Jan 2012 13:27

Sorry if this has been posted previously: Supreme Court's view point of 1983 on the Indian armed forces. Is this a pointer to the possible conclusion of the SC?

http://indianmilitarynews.wordpress.com/tag/vk-singh/

There is also a discussion of Gen VK Singh's case, which I realize many on BR would not agree with.

aditp · Post by **aditp** » 23 Jan 2012 13:46

Read the footnote - "via India Today"

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Jan 2012 14:26

I have been keenly studyng the views of former service chiefs and senior multi-starred service officers.All have impeccale records and reputations,at least in the public domain.Those who have objected to the Chief's going to court have done so only on the basis that a "serving chief" should not have done so.They would've perhaps preferred him to resign in protest at being treated so shabbily-one even said "what difference would it make if he served for less or more time?". But this is the very crux of the matter/

1.Firstly,what this sad situ highlights is the yawning gap in coimmunciations/relationship between the political masters and the service chiefs and armed forces.As I wrote earlier,the services and their chiefs are treated like prized pets-but kept in the kennel,NOT in the house like most of us do,mainly to warn off intruders,exhibit at dog shows (Republic Day parades,Review of the fleet,Air shows,etc.) for the public's entertainment.When they're hungry or need affection,a bone is thrown to them and some "toys" are bought for the entertainment."Go chase the cat" is their attitude when Doggy comes with wagging tail,wanting to tell master something,especially ill-treatment by the "handlers",the babus.
There is NO trust at all for the chiefs/forces.The GOI in rejecting the chief's DOB is virtually "calllig him a liar".It thus ha shown its contempt for his office as well.

2.This gap has been deliberately maintained by the handlers/babus.Contrast this with the way in which HM the Queen treats her Corgis? The British armed froces are "family members",who sit at the high table and are parly top all major foreig policy decisions,without which Britiain would not be able to conduct her foreign policy.We have to look at Libya for the latest example of Britain "showing the flag" and preserving its reputation as a strong nation that will exercise its military power when required. In our situ,the babus want to manipulate the forces to suit their own vested interests,especially when billions upon billions of $ are spent each yer especially in foreign imports.

3.The "line of succession",something that is absolutely unacceptable as a fundamental right,as Adm. Bhagwat and others have ponted out,which will usher in mediocrity instead of meritocracy.It is the insidious tool of the babu,to establish a "rule book",especially for the services,when we know that the first rule of war is that their are no rules! The manner in which Gen.Singh's term is attempted to be curtailed leads to much suspicion that his succesor has already been chosen by the power weilding coterie,who are now in need of a pliable chief to sign on the dotted line for the massive purchses in the pipeline.Even if Gen Singh is ousted,after so much of light has been thrown upon his successor and his alleged dubious links,what respect will he get he get even if he jumps the queue?THis is why despite it looking like a breach of etiquette,given the ramifications that will follow,Gen.Singh is totally wihtin his rights to seek justice from the courts.It is also in the national interest.If Gen. Singh wins his case,he must be allowed to serve his full term.Sacking him after the verdict will only show the nation who the true enemies of the country are!

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 23 Jan 2012 15:27

http://www.firstpost.com/politics/apolo ... 90944.html

The first one of many more "apologies" to come from the media.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 23 Jan 2012 17:49

philip - you are being too generous with the british system. the only thing that the british service chiefs can count on from the government is a budget cut

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jan 2012 17:52

From the Karan Thapar hosted Devil's Advocate with General SR Chowdhary as guest:
(http://ibnlive.in.com/news/army-itself- ... 245-3.html)

Karan Thapar: Now I have it from unimpeachable sources, sadly I am not at liberty to revel who they are, that on three different occasions in separate meeting with Defence Secretary, the Defence Minister and finally the Finance Minister, the Army Chief was asked how this matter should be resolved and he said the way to do so was for the government to issue a statement saying that on the basis of the certificates he is shown, they accept the 1951 is his date of birth and then adding significantly in the same statement that he was appointed Army Chief in the believe that his date of birth was1950. Therefore his retirement was fixed for May 2012 and now that retirement date will be maintained regardless of the amendment in his date of birth. Sadly, the government didn't accept this resolution suggested to them. Do you think the government was wrong in refusing to accept the resolution?

Only the most stupid, short sighted and egotistical minds would not accept the above solution from the General. This has chut*yapanti from MOD babus written all over this.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Jan 2012 17:59

A matter of honour vs propriety
By Raj Chengappa Editor-in-Chief

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jan 2012 18:04

^^^The GOI (read babus) continue to speak in different voices. Over the last week, each one of the "doubts" has been cleared and put to rest. But we conitnue to see hit jobs like above. And it is quite fascinating that every effort is being to find some loophole in the VKS's arguments and somehow paint him in bad light. This is exactly the kind of behaviour which pushed VKS to go to court. And this time, no less a person than Edito-in Chief has been roped in - and the details being bandied as being "juicy" and the whole article has a conspiratorial tone to it....somehow, the very same "investigative" journalism spirit goes to deep sleep in matters concerning INC and the "family".....I'm sure some director in some obscure office of IB handed over this story to the good editor and who promptly displayed it in the show case.

Seems Unnithan is not the only hit-man in the quiver....again, ack thoo!!!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Jan 2012 18:17

Just seen Raj C's first part about the "anomalies" in the quest for the actual DOB.Intriguing.The plot thickens.

Badar · Post by **Badar** » 23 Jan 2012 18:35

rajrang wrote:Sorry if this has been posted previously: Supreme Court's view point of 1983 on the Indian armed forces. Is this a pointer to the possible conclusion of the SC?
http://indianmilitarynews.wordpress.com/tag/vk-singh/
There is also a discussion of Gen VK Singh's case, which I realize many on BR would not agree with.

Any lawyer types here who could throw light on the applicability of this on VKS case?

Badar · Post by **Badar** » 23 Jan 2012 18:48

I have a question about the VKS case and the question of self-interest motivation: Can it be argued that whatever the result of the current case and the subsequent length of his tenure, he is now an untouchable wrt to any post retirement service with GoI or affiliated institutions. i.e. diplomatic, honorary political appointments, major think tank etc? Viz, purely from the point of view of self interest, VKS would have been better served by just lying down and accepting the government bottom line rather than taking them to court?

Another question, regarding impact on future promotions: Defense scams have resulted in such an over the top "correct to the T" procedures to ensure honesty and transparency that defense procurements are now is in doldrums due to excessive bureaucratic red-tape. Is a similar blowback effect likely wrt to senior officer promotions? Will inordinate emphasis be placed on a candidate with all the i's dotted and t's crossed at the cost of other more desirable traits?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 23 Jan 2012 18:56

Et Tu Chengappa???

Wonder what the price of that was???

Maybe they read this thread - founf us mentioning the calibre of Raj C in the past and went out and got him

Badar - not all chiefs care about these. Only those who continue to want the good life at government expense.

or those the GOI considers useful for manipulating state politics for example

Badar · Post by **Badar** » 23 Jan 2012 18:59

Surya wrote:Et Tu Chengappa???

Wonder what the price of that was???

Maybe they read this thread - founf us mentioning the calibre of Raj C in the past and went out and got him

Why question the motivation of everyone who holds the contrary position on this case? Is it not possible that they can both be honest and still come to a contrary conclusion about issues?

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 23 Jan 2012 19:04

rohitvats wrote:From the Karan Thapar hosted Devil's Advocate with General SR Chowdhary as guest:
(http://ibnlive.in.com/news/army-itself- ... 245-3.html)

Karan Thapar: Now I have it from unimpeachable sources, sadly I am not at liberty to revel who they are, that on three different occasions in separate meeting with Defence Secretary, the Defence Minister and finally the Finance Minister, the Army Chief was asked how this matter should be resolved and he said the way to do so was for the government to issue a statement saying that on the basis of the certificates he is shown, they accept the 1951 is his date of birth and then adding significantly in the same statement that he was appointed Army Chief in the believe that his date of birth was1950. Therefore his retirement was fixed for May 2012 and now that retirement date will be maintained regardless of the amendment in his date of birth. Sadly, the government didn't accept this resolution suggested to them. Do you think the government was wrong in refusing to accept the resolution?
Only the most stupid, short sighted and egotistical minds would not accept the above solution from the General. This has chut*yapanti from MOD babus written all over this.

Kya re baba?! Abhi bhi tujhe only MoD babus at fault nazar aata hai? MoD babus do stuff in a vacuum is it?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jan 2012 19:05

Badar wrote:
Surya wrote:Et Tu Chengappa???

Wonder what the price of that was???

Maybe they read this thread - founf us mentioning the calibre of Raj C in the past and went out and got him
Why question the motivation of everyone who holds the contrary position on this case? Is it not possible that they can both be honest and still come to a contrary conclusion about issues?

Any why not? The way these articles have been written, even a 10 year old could tell that these were written with a mala-fide intention. Where is the objectivity in the entire article? Where have the facts been presented and then, an anlysis undertaken to give a balanced view? The tenor and structure of the article(s) itself goes to show what is being intended. And you want peoplw like me not to question the motivation of reporters and editors like Raj C? Why so?

Another point - are you sure what the editor presents in the article is simply a contrary opinion or is it attempted statement of facts in a manner to mould opinion of the public at large?

Badar · Post by **Badar** » 23 Jan 2012 19:07

Surya wrote:Badar - not all chiefs care about these. Only those who continue to want the good life at government expense. or those the GOI considers useful for manipulating state politics for example

So if I were a career and post-career minded big shot, then I would definitely not quarrel with the GoI for a mere ten months.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 23 Jan 2012 19:14

if you depict the IA chief as some sort of warlord and blame him for the artillery decision pending for 20 plus yrs -you have no credibility.

If they are honest they would written it in some of the other formats (many on this thread) we have seen with details of various proof and how suddnely it seemed to become an issue.

I did not see any other news mag put that sort of headline.

I am sure the IOUs are being cashed by people who in the past probably provided some rich sources of info.