+1shiv wrote:This could be a soap opera you know.
Indian Army: News & Discussion
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
^^^You can say that as long as the proof of what Gen Katoch said during the program is protected by the powers that be.
To you and me this might be a non issue. To a person in uniform it may not be so.
To you and me this might be a non issue. To a person in uniform it may not be so.
Last edited by nelson on 12 Feb 2012 22:03, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Ah thanks. So he was promoted by his 1951 date but ordered to accept his corps Command on the basis of the 1950 date. Is that correct? It would have been dishonorable to disobey that order? Is that correct?chaanakya wrote:
That is the catch here. you can be promoted as Lt Gen yet not made Army Commander ( in same rank) to be eligible for COAS. In Govt parlance, specific postings are not a right of the Govt servant. So he could not have complained.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
He was ordered to accept his DoB as 1950. That was before assuming appointment as GOC 2 Corps.shiv wrote:...
Ordered to do what? Accept his DoB as 1951? After all that is what the record says (image posted by Chanakya) and that is what the General accepts. Where was the coercion here?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Is there any evidence that you are not biased yourself? This is the simplest and most obvious way of tearing down your views. That is exactly what happens and I think you know that.nelson wrote: The army is rotten at the top because it suits the politicians and bureaucrats that way. They want pliant Generals and they ensure that they get it. When someone steps out of line they make an Arora out of him. If still the person reaches the top they make a VKS out of him.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Then what honor is he fighting for now?nelson wrote:He was ordered to accept his DoB as 1950. That was before assuming appointment as GOC 2 Corps.shiv wrote:...
Ordered to do what? Accept his DoB as 1951? After all that is what the record says (image posted by Chanakya) and that is what the General accepts. Where was the coercion here?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Well, we are in hypothetical domain now.shiv wrote:
Is Gen VK Singh part of this conspiracy to promote Gen Bikram Singh or not? If he is how is he part of the conspiracy? If he is not part of it is he a victim? If so how has he been victimized? Or are we just shifting on to some other topic unconnected with VK Singh now that it is almost over?
So its difficult to venture here beyond some point.
VKS could not be overlooked despite age issue. Only if he could be retired somehow before 2013 that the so called succession plan, which is mentioned by Mr GEV AG in his notings , could have worked. So while getting promotion as Lt Gen he would have retired by 2013 after the juice was extracted from him he would retire by 2012 and thus succession Plan succeed. He was victim in getting his DOB controversy raked up when it was closed as per MDS sheet with MOD for all his promotions up to 2006. His honor was also sullied in the process by hit pieces by as called by some here "low lifes" besides losing one year , which was not his main concern.
I think , Shiv, this fall out was being discussed from the beginning. There is no shifting of goal post as BRF is equally concerned with all other ramifications as with the individual officer's issue.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-new ... 09688.aspx
They said in case Gen Singh resigns in the next few days, Western Army Commander Lt Gen Shankar Rajan Ghosh can also be considered for the appointment.
Lt Gen Ghosh is the seniormost officer after the Gen Singh in the Army.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
He is contesting that, the then Chiefs promised to reconcile the date issue in due course, which did not materialise.shiv wrote:Then what honor is he fighting for now?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Not till 29 Feb. Lt Gen Ahluwalia is the seniormost Lt Gen as on date.pgbhat wrote:http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-new ... 09688.aspxThey said in case Gen Singh resigns in the next few days, Western Army Commander Lt Gen Shankar Rajan Ghosh can also be considered for the appointment.
Lt Gen Ghosh is the seniormost officer after the Gen Singh in the Army.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
'Succession plan' was not conceived only for the purpose to limit VKS's term. This plan is there for some time. We known this conspiracy was hatched in 2006, ie. during UPA-I. Why this UPA-I wants to fix a career of someone who is supposed to be a Chief in UPA-II? This is the important question that unravels the mystery behind this, I think.chaanakya wrote:However SC has not gone into merits of the case and there ends the matter. Mystery remains and it would be a black mark on UPA-II and not on the General who has nothing to prove to anybody about himself. Probably the matter is best left as it is now and hopefully , this does not get repeated. But that is too much to expect.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Very pertinent question.Kanson wrote:'Succession plan' was not conceived only for the purpose to limit VKS's term. This plan is there for some time. We known this conspiracy was hatched in 2006, ie. during UPA-I. Why this UPA-I wants to fix a career of someone who is supposed to be a Chief in UPA-II? This is the important question that unravels the mystery behind this, I think.chaanakya wrote:However SC has not gone into merits of the case and there ends the matter. Mystery remains and it would be a black mark on UPA-II and not on the General who has nothing to prove to anybody about himself. Probably the matter is best left as it is now and hopefully , this does not get repeated. But that is too much to expect.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
What was that, if you could pls ?nelson wrote:^^^You can say that as long as the proof of what Gen Katoch said during the program is protected by the powers that be.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
In fact that is what it looks like to me reading the sequence of events you have posted belowchaanakya wrote: Well, we are in hypothetical domain now.
chaanakya wrote: VKS could not be overlooked despite age issue. Only if he could be retired somehow before 2013 that the so called succession plan, which is mentioned by Mr GEV AG in his notings , could have worked. So while getting promotion as Lt Gen he would have retired by 2013 after the juice was extracted from him he would retire by 2012 and thus succession Plan succeed. He was victim in getting his DOB controversy raked up when it was closed as per MDS sheet with MOD for all his promotions up to 2006. His honor was also sullied in the process by hit pieces by as called by some here "low lifes" besides losing one year , which was not his main concern.
I think , Shiv, this fall out was being discussed from the beginning. There is no shifting of goal post as BRF is equally concerned with all other ramifications as with the individual officer's issue.
This sort of thing could have happened many times in the past for lower rank appointments as well. Just because they were not raked up does not mean that the army was squeaky clean till this happened. I just wonder what would have happened to this fantastically conceived plan if VK Singh should have been incapacitated early? The other thing is if VK Singh is complicit in the plan to promote Bikram Singh, then he should sit tight and not make waves. If he is against this Bikram Singh conspiracy he has done little to alter the inevitable course. So what is VK Singh's role in this?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
^^He came out with details of the succession plan and the root cause of this mis-happening.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... tle/223650
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... tle/223650
Last edited by nelson on 12 Feb 2012 22:19, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
UPA-! knew that there would be UPA-2. How? Oh I know. EVMs. I guess we could look forward to UPA-3 now?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
I think you did not get what Kanson meant. UPA-2 could have been NDA-3 or UF-4. But getting your man in a key position is important for UPA-1. Is it not?shiv wrote:UPA-! knew that there would be UPA-2. How? Oh I know. EVMs. I guess we could look forward to UPA-3 now?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Then the case is of breach of promise/cheating etc. Nothing to do with his honor. No?nelson wrote:He is contesting that, the then Chiefs promised to reconcile the date issue in due course, which did not materialise.shiv wrote:Then what honor is he fighting for now?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Fair enough. But it is easy to question his motives. Don't you think that if he was so concerned about this dirty conspiracy he could have resigned early on health grounds? Instead he chose to try and extend his tenure by a year and he exposed this conspiracy as the reason that his tenure was not being extended. The General obeyed orders when he was being promoted to Corps commander and accepted a false DoB, but now he wants his DoB back not for himself to serve an extra year as COAS, but to save the army from this succession terrible conspiracy.nelson wrote:^^He came out with details of the succession plan and the root cause of this mis-happening.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... tle/223650
That is a very very shaky story.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Fine. But was VK Singh in the conspiracy or not? Everyone knows about the conspiracy. Surely he knew too.nelson wrote:I think you did not get what Kanson meant. UPA-2 could have been NDA-3 or UF-4. But getting your man in a key position is important for UPA-1. Is it not?shiv wrote:UPA-! knew that there would be UPA-2. How? Oh I know. EVMs. I guess we could look forward to UPA-3 now?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
If he were to make a case against JJ or DK, yes certainly. But when he himself is to approach the court after the govt refused to redress his grievance, it is honour that is in question.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Well, 1962 did happen. It is nobody's claim that Army is squeaky clean and MOD is all rotten. And these things keep happening. How much traction these gain depends on variety of factors.shiv wrote: This sort of thing could have happened many times in the past for lower rank appointments as well. Just because they were not raked up does not mean that the army was squeaky clean till this happened.
I can give any number of reasons to promote the man in succession Plan. But then he could also be shown door by invoking reason of the loss of confidence by next Govt of another party. The insitution would greatly suffer.shiv wrote: I just wonder what would have happened to this fantastically conceived plan if VK Singh should have been incapacitated early?
I don't think he was complicit . He did succeed in bringing up this issue to the fore. I don't think he was concerned with succession Plan. It was AG and Govt who were concerned with protecting succession Plan. It was JJ who drew the Plan. VKS was no asked o prepare any plan to the best of my knowledge or to protect any existing plan. In fact there is such a plan came to be known only after AG's legal opinion was made public.shiv wrote: The other thing is if VK Singh is complicit in the plan to promote Bikram Singh, then he should sit tight and not make waves. If he is against this Bikram Singh conspiracy he has done little to alter the inevitable course.
He unwittingly became the boulder on the road of someone's career progression. Had he not been tackled ,someone else could have become COAS.shiv wrote: So what is VK Singh's role in this?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
nelson wrote:If he were to make a case against JJ or DK, yes certainly. But when he himself is to approach the court after the govt refused to redress his grievance, it is honour that is in question.
Who are JJ and DK?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Now again, VKS's stance is that "show my DoB as 1951 and send me home as it pleases you?" This is recorded in B&W in his petition.shiv wrote:Fair enough. But it is easy to question his motives. Don't you think that if he was so concerned about this dirty conspiracy he could have resigned early on health grounds? Instead he chose to try and extend his tenure by a year and he exposed this conspiracy as the reason that his tenure was not being extended. The General obeyed orders when he was being promoted to Corps commander and accepted a false DoB, but now he wants his DoB back not for himself to serve an extra year as COAS, but to save the army from this succession terrible conspiracy.nelson wrote:^^He came out with details of the succession plan and the root cause of this mis-happening.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... tle/223650
That is a very very shaky story.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Gen JJ Singh and Gen Deepak Kapoor.shiv wrote:nelson wrote:If he were to make a case against JJ or DK, yes certainly. But when he himself is to approach the court after the govt refused to redress his grievance, it is honour that is in question.
Who are JJ and DK?
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Leaving aside the dismal story of the VKS DoB saga for a moment, I am trying to understand the line of succession issue itself.
I haven't paid much attention to the conspiracy theories (all presented as conjecture with no evidence to back them up) about succession plan. I wonder why people are against a succession plan per se? If it was a practice used to play favoritism/nepotism then the that is the problem - not the succession plan itself.
I can think of why the GoI/MinDef/HighCommand might want an carefully orchestrated line of succession - which might not be for any nefarious reason. I understand that at the very highest level promotions are by convention rigidly seniority based (though the govt reserves the right to hire/fire anyone anytime). What happens if you have two generals, for the sake of argument say General Patton and General Eisenhower. I would certainly like to have promotions so carefully structured so as to ensure that while G. Patton gets an Army Command, he is never in the running for Army Chief post - where G. Eisenhower is promotions are timed to carefully edge Patton out. I hope I have made my argument clear.
Also does the line of succession have any bearing at all from the fact that the Army High command is vulnerable to a sudden decapitating strike.
I haven't paid much attention to the conspiracy theories (all presented as conjecture with no evidence to back them up) about succession plan. I wonder why people are against a succession plan per se? If it was a practice used to play favoritism/nepotism then the that is the problem - not the succession plan itself.
I can think of why the GoI/MinDef/HighCommand might want an carefully orchestrated line of succession - which might not be for any nefarious reason. I understand that at the very highest level promotions are by convention rigidly seniority based (though the govt reserves the right to hire/fire anyone anytime). What happens if you have two generals, for the sake of argument say General Patton and General Eisenhower. I would certainly like to have promotions so carefully structured so as to ensure that while G. Patton gets an Army Command, he is never in the running for Army Chief post - where G. Eisenhower is promotions are timed to carefully edge Patton out. I hope I have made my argument clear.
Also does the line of succession have any bearing at all from the fact that the Army High command is vulnerable to a sudden decapitating strike.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
nelson wrote:If he were to make a case against JJ or DK, yes certainly. But when he himself is to approach the court after the govt refused to redress his grievance, it is honour that is in question.
shiv wrote: Who are JJ and DK?
Isn't DK retired with partial deafness and enhanced disability pension ?? I remember , this being discussed in BRF.nelson wrote: Gen JJ Singh and Gen Deepak Kapoor.
JJ sent to Arunachal Pradesh.
VKS could have gone to Sikkim.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
That is the problem. He knew of the plan, but he was concerned about the plan only because he was not going to get an extension? Not because it was a diabolical plan? Was he saying "Let me be COAS for one more year and this conspiracy of JJ Singh will be thwarted?"chaanakya wrote: I don't think he was complicit . He did succeed in bringing up this issue to the fore. I don't think he was concerned with succession Plan. It was AG and Govt who were concerned with protecting succession Plan. It was JJ who drew the Plan.
I would have thought that any lawyer arguing against Singh would be able to pin him down on such a weak story.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Fair enough. Why did he bring up the succession conspiracy then? He was right all along even without bringing up that complication which would weaken his case.nelson wrote:
Now again, VKS's stance is that "show my DoB as 1951 and send me home as it pleases you?" This is recorded in B&W in his petition.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Does AG's Notings qualify as a proof?Badar wrote:
I haven't paid much attention to the conspiracy theories (all presented as conjecture with no evidence to back them up) about succession plan. I wonder why people are against a succession plan per se? If it was a practice used to play favoritism/nepotism then the that is the problem - not the succession plan itself. .
And a Plan need not be conspiracy. Govt may like to know the Chief , well in advance, as Defense policies and postures are generally long term. I don't see as conspiracy but seek to know the legal basis and not the pragmatism behind it. It could be sinister Plan given the credentials of UPA but need not be called conspiracy.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Yes, and DK would have become Vice-Chairman NDMA but for his flat in Adarsh.chaanakya wrote: Isn't DK retired with partial deafness and enhanced disability pension ?? I remember , this being discussed in BRF.
JJ sent to Arunachal Pradesh.
VKS could have gone to Sikkim.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Where did he bring it up?? at least not in affidavit to SC or anywhere else. Please enlighten me.shiv wrote:
Fair enough. Why did he bring up the succession conspiracy then? He was right all along even without bringing up that complication which would weaken his case.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
See he succeeded unknowingly. He could have known once AG notings was made public. All along he was taking about DOB , Honor and integrity,never about his successor as far as I know. He never talked about this "conspiracy". These are talked about by other concerned souls.shiv wrote:That is the problem. He knew of the plan, but he was concerned about the plan only because he was not going to get an extension? Not because it was a diabolical plan? Was he saying "Let me be COAS for one more year and this conspiracy of JJ Singh will be thwarted?"chaanakya wrote: I don't think he was complicit . He did succeed in bringing up this issue to the fore. I don't think he was concerned with succession Plan. It was AG and Govt who were concerned with protecting succession Plan. It was JJ who drew the Plan.
I would have thought that any lawyer arguing against Singh would be able to pin him down on such a weak story.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
VKS has not brought up any succession conspiracy, as yet. Definitely not in the court.shiv wrote:Fair enough. Why did he bring up the succession conspiracy then? He was right all along even without bringing up that complication which would weaken his case.nelson wrote:
Now again, VKS's stance is that "show my DoB as 1951 and send me home as it pleases you?" This is recorded in B&W in his petition.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Sure, I'll accept it. I am looking for something to convince myself, not what might be suitable for a court of law.chaanakya wrote:Does AG's Notings qualify as a proof?
I believe AG mentioned a plan of succession. That it was for a nefarious reason is what is still conjectural.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
nelson wrote:VKS has not brought up any succession conspiracy, as yet. Definitely not in the court.shiv wrote:
Fair enough. Why did he bring up the succession conspiracy then? He was right all along even without bringing up that complication which would weaken his case.
But nelsonji - earlier in this thread, in response to a question I asked as to what VK Singh's role is in this succession conspiracy, you said:
nelson wrote:^^He came out with details of the succession plan and the root cause of this mis-happening.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... tle/223650
-
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 59
- Joined: 05 Feb 2010 10:16
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
That is exactly what I have been trying to say. The SC has nothing to do with the succession plan and the general had also not petitioned anything about it (at least from reading publicly available info). The SC was deciding on a purely legal point and has ruled accordingly. People are free to disagree with that, but that is coming more from issues surrounding succession plan. If Arora were the successor, would vks have gone to court and would there would have been such an outcry?Surya wrote:The other thing is that Bikram Singh is slated to possibly be the next COAS. Are you suggesting that the next COAS of the Indian army was decided years ago by sidelining Ravi Arora. That matter seems unconnected with VK Singh's fight but that is a serious allegation to make. Gives us something to discuss on this thread for the next 2 years
Yes thats what many are saying. especially PC Katoch (read his articles - the man is a straight shooter - )
I think you missed some of this in this thread.
Basically the VKS thing is a sideshow to the main issue - which is that a succession plan was decided in 2006 and in order to make that happen people who could come up in between were railroaded or shunted.
Arora was Bikram singhs batch mate. Topped that batch and was outstanding enough to head Red Forces.
Yes if Bikram Singh becomes Chief because this will always be lurking in the background. Every decision of his will be analyzed etc. (except by Unnithan ....)
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
That was in reply to Kanson's earlier question asking me what Lt Grn Katoch said in the NDTV program.shiv wrote:But nelsonji - earlier in this thread, in response to a question I asked as to what VK Singh's role is in this succession conspiracy, you said:nelson wrote:^^He came out with details of the succession plan and the root cause of this mis-happening.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... tle/223650
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
So VK Singh did not bring it up. The succession plan has nothing to do with the VK Singh's case but is being brought up as a bogey here. They are two separate issues. Why are people on BRF connecting up the two issues? And how does bringing up this issue unconnected with VK Singhs case not qualify as shifting the goalpost?chaanakya wrote:Where did he bring it up?? at least not in affidavit to SC or anywhere else. Please enlighten me.shiv wrote:
Fair enough. Why did he bring up the succession conspiracy then? He was right all along even without bringing up that complication which would weaken his case.
The government may be wrong in planing someone's succession, but how does that translate into VK Singh being dishonored when he has been elevated to the highest rank in the army out of turn and he has accepted that? How does the Supreme court become untrustworthy and be accused of not going into the merits of the case as has been stated on this thread? The Supreme court could have insulted the general with a verdict given what has been said so far.
Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion
Actually there could be no legal basis for such a plan. If you select one and announce him, you take hell of risk. Besides Constitution does not permit such a plan. All the time you need a panel of equally meritorious and senior people from whom you can select COAS, need not be senior most, though supercession needs a lot more explanation which UPA II could ill afford.Badar wrote:Sure, I'll accept it. I am looking for something to convince myself, not what might be suitable for a court of law.chaanakya wrote:Does AG's Notings qualify as a proof?
I believe AG mentioned a plan of succession. That it was for a nefarious reason is what is still conjectural.
Sinister in the way it seeks to edge out someone who is qualified and push in someone who would have retired in normal course though being equally qualified. It limits the options for others as well.