Questioning the Army's Methodologies

HariC · Post by **HariC** » 30 Jan 2009 22:36

About WoP. What changes from 1947 till now do you grudge? Moving constitutional authorities above service chiefs, or moving the Cabinet Secretary above service chiefs? What else has got changed? Where, in your opinion should the Service Chiefs be placed? Have you looked at the case in Britain {which is a country closest to us in the form of governance}? Where are the senior military officers placed as compared to senior civil service officers in their Senior Executive Service? Where are they placed compared to the politicians? How many posts are considered senior government posts in UK? How many of them are civil posts, how many military? How do they stand in proportion to the size of the civilian workforce and the military workforce? Is the Cabinet Secretary (in UK) senior or junior to the CDS?

There are different standards in the west. Many politicians in the US and in UK , as well as officials are forced to be upright and honest. the same cant be said for our babu and polticians - can it? The Lok Sabha MP from my erstwhile place of residence was a career criminal whose goons murdered dozens (under his orders). Now this thug who spent years in jail got into politics and became an MP on brute power. Now that goon will someday become a minister too. boy am i glad that the WoP puts him above the service chiefs

Abhi_G · Post by **Abhi_G** » 30 Jan 2009 22:37

ajay_ijn wrote:
Then, of course, lack of basic amenities, paltry pay and allowances also play on their minds. But the jawans "gave lesser weight" to personal and family problems as compared to "harassment and humiliation, which caused hurt to self-esteem and forced them to resort to such extreme steps", says the report.
who would harass a man with a gun?

MohanG wrote:^^^

Now, that's an interesting question.

MohanG wrote:
Rahul M wrote: would a soldier carry his service INSAS into his village when on leave.
Please read the ToI link.

MohanG, understand fully. But the ToIlet article you quote does not contain any information that jawans carry home their guns when on leave. That was my point.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 Jan 2009 22:49

mohan, as abhig mentions that link says nothing to suggest that soldiers are allowed to carry their weapons while on leave.

bhavin · Post by **bhavin** » 30 Jan 2009 22:59

A question for the knowledgeable - why are we comparing the statistics and data points from other countries ?? To me it doesn't make much sense to say that because X does Y, India should do Y too... London is becoming londonistan, should we let Mumbai become Mumbaistan ??

Also comparing the salaries for US and India does not make much sense... In US, everything costs comparatively less (or atleast used to until this crisis)... I don't spend equivalent amount of money, for example eating out in US as I would in India. In US, a person earning $50,000 can have a relatively decent life with a simple house, a simple car etc... Also per capita income of US is around $38,00 whereas in India it is $3,000 (figures are approximate).... But that 38,000 can take you much further in US than 3,000 can in India...

just my humble opinion..

HariC · Post by **HariC** » 30 Jan 2009 23:09

bhavin wrote:A question for the knowledgeable - why are we comparing the statistics and data points from other countries ?? To me it doesn't make much sense to say that because X does Y, India should do Y too... London is becoming londonistan, should we let Mumbai become Mumbaistan ??

Also comparing the salaries for US and India does not make much sense... In US, everything costs comparatively less (or atleast used to until this crisis)... I don't spend equivalent amount of money, for example eating out in US as I would in India. In US, a person earning $50,000 can have a relatively decent life with a simple house, a simple car etc... Also per capita income of US is around $38,00 whereas in India it is $3,000 (figures are approximate).... But that 38,000 can take you much further in US than 3,000 can in India...

just my humble opinion..

egjacly.. and the attempt to compare "starter" salaries of jawans is also misleading. I have clearly posted above what an experienced subedar gets in India (Rs 21000 pm) vs what an equiv soldier may get in the US. ($6000 pm - suck on that DOOs

!)

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 30 Jan 2009 23:20

Haric - while i totally agree that indian army is under paid, we should also consider facts pertaining to cost of living. I have lived in a cantonment and went to a kv and the cost was IIRC 18rs/3mnths. Accommodation in Military quarters was very cheap. I think some of these perks that military personnel enjoy(rightfully) should be considered before making a statement about cost of living.

MohanG · Post by **MohanG** » 30 Jan 2009 23:23

Rahul M,

Thanks for the link. I read some parts. Shiv has posted links to some interesting studies.

Ray C wrote:But the essences is ''Can you to do X or Y".

Is there any other way out?

I can't fly an airplane. I have flown helicopters. So, am I the best judge on the issue?

I have never been a Foreign Minister, but I am tolerably quite clued up about it. But am I as good as Pranab Mukherjee?

No one suggests that commentators on this board here are fit to take up the job of a fighter pilot. (ok! maybe some might be.) But many people here are intelligent enough to know if the fighter pilot is bluffing. Many more will be able to talk intelligently about fighter aircrafts in general, or war strategy in general. The fighter pilot has a niche skill, he would be ill-advised to overstretch his niche knowledge.

Those who are studying the issue have no clue of ground realities and base it on the opinions of those who they interview and treat.

Don't know them. However, I hope they are trained psychologists who have designed a proper scientific study. A well designed and carefully executed study is very valuable. In fact anecdotal accounts are used to design the study and to form hypotheses to test. The Director of the institute seems a very qualified person.

I have found in my, heaven knows how many years of service, that if a man is listened to patiently and then explained as to why one is taking a decision the way he is, the man is satisfied, even if it does not go his way!

True. And this is the man-management part. As you indicated earlier, many young army officers are becoming economical with the time they spend with their men. And rectifying that needs no additional dose of 'status'.

Rahul M, Abhi G,

IMO the word harassment in the expression "humiliation and harassment" refers to workplace harassment. Therefore, the issue of "carrying the gun to the village" does not arise.

Hari C wrote:There are different standards in the west. Many politicians in the US and in UK , as well as officials are forced to be upright and honest. the same cant be said for our babu and polticians - can it? The Lok Sabha MP from my erstwhile place of residence was a career criminal whose goons murdered dozens (under his orders). Now this thug who spent years in jail got into politics and became an MP on brute power. Now that goon will someday become a minister too. boy am i glad that the WoP puts him above the service chiefs

If your MP has got elected, the people of your constituency must have voted for him. If the public does not like the guy, they will throw him out. They have indeed defeated giants like Indira Gandhi. If we want cleaner politicians, we should encourage cleaner people to enter and sustain themselves in politics. Why don't we want Ministers to be placed above the Army Chief? Lets drop the charade and adopt military rule like Pakistan. That will solve all the WoP problems.

And be not so sure about the standards of politicians in the West. What is the net worth of Bill Clinton today?

A subedar in the Indian Army with 28 years of service will get 21,080 per month or about 2,50,000 Rs per annum.
try living in a medium town for a familiy of four. best of luck with getting some good education for your kids. http://www.indianmilitary.info/2008/08/ ... rears.html

A Sgt Major in the US Army with 21 years of service will get $84,793.92 USD per annum. Which is PRETTY comfortable for an average US family.
http://www.dod.mil/cgi-bin/rmc.pl (enter E9, 21 Years of service)

Look at the opportunities available for the Subedar in India vs the Sgt major in the US. now tell me, the Sgt Major has undergone more stress than the Indian subedar and I will believe pigs fly too.

Lets talk public finance. If we want to spend 2 to 3 percent of our GDP on Defence (who decides? The Parliament does.), then we have to see our paying capacity also. In your example the subedar will earn about 6 times the per capita income of the country, the US Sgt Major will earn less than 2 times the per capita income of his country. My dear, the common public of this country pays taxes that provide for the pay of public servants. And about a quarter of the population lives below poverty line. The level of malnutrition is more than that of Sub-Saharan Africa. {Now, don't start blaming the neta-babu raj}. There is a limit to what we can pay. If you think some public servants should be paid more, adopt the democratic method - petition your MP, threaten to vote him out if he doesn't raise his voice.

Sanju · Post by **Sanju** » 30 Jan 2009 23:31

To Mohan G - You keep comparing the US to India in the way it treats its soldiers. When was the last time you checked the Atlas?

If not in the recent past let me refresh your memory-
US:
Northern Border - Canada (one of its close ally - if not the closest)
Southern Border- Mexico (another ally)
Western Border - Pacific Ocean
Eastern Border - Atlantic Ocean

India:
Northern Border - Pakistan & China
Eastern Border - China & Bangladesh (Mini me - ie, Mini Porkistan)
Western Border - Pakistan (T-COW aka Terror Capital Of the World)
Southern Border - Indian Ocean

Our soldiers are constantly on the border on the alert for offensive actions by the enemy and fighting terrorists within the country. Tell me 1 state in the US that is fighting insurgency.

The only time America fought an enemy force in a battle on its (American) land was close to 200 years ago with Canada (then known as British North America - the White House was burnt by the Canadians).

America is fortunate in its geographic location that it does not need the soldiers to be on constant guard. India is fortunate in its location very unfortunate in the neighbours that shares its borders.

In the US the soldier is used to enforce American foreign policy. India stands free and united in spite of its foreign policy and we have to thank our Soldiers for that.

It is very rare for the Military in the US to be called out for things other than soldierly duties. In India there are riots - call the Army, there is Tsunami -call the Navy, if there are landslides and floods - call the Air Force. We are a country with limited means unlike the States that has a force for every eventuality and then some. That is why there is a need for the status / izzat that needs to be given to the Armed Forces.

India can survive without quite a few of the bureaucrats but each and every soldier is needed to protect the borders of the nations and its sovereignty.

Please let us not make fools of ourselves and waste time in a meaningless comparisons. You seem well articulated why bother with this comparison.

Bhavin well put!

Sanju · Post by **Sanju** » 30 Jan 2009 23:38

suryag wrote:Haric - while i totally agree that indian army is under paid, we should also consider facts pertaining to cost of living. I have lived in a cantonment and went to a kv and the cost was IIRC 18rs/3mnths. Accommodation in Military quarters was very cheap. I think some of these perks that military personnel enjoy(rightfully) should be considered before making a statement about cost of living.

Suryag,

I too went to the KV and lived in Cantonment and yes it was subsidized, with one exception - my Father was n't living with us - no He wasn't in the Gelf earning Dirhams or Rials- he was in the forward area taking active part fighting the insurgency. Would that active part be considered a perk? Honour yes, but not perk in anyway.

You have to look at the whole picture not the hole in the picture.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 30 Jan 2009 23:47

Sanju - My post was targeted at this statement "try living in a medium town for a familiy of four". Definitely, my old man did better than his friends (who didnt venture out of their villages) in terms of standards of living.

MohanG · Post by **MohanG** » 30 Jan 2009 23:56

^^^

It is true that US has 'good' neighbors. Wish we had the same situation

But the US military has been deeply involved in promoting their national interests around the world. Compare the number of US soldiers and Indian soldiers who have died since 1947 - in wars or in counterinsurgency. You will realize their military's contribution to their nation is no less than our military's to our nation.

About our military being called out to help the civil authority too often, we have discussed it in great detail a few pages before. This is only a propaganda by military officers.

How many bureaucrats do you want to shelve? In which departments? How much money will it save? How much more per month would you be able to give to our soldiers by taking such a step?

Heh.. Heh, I am also from KV.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 31 Jan 2009 00:25

@MohanG: You seem to be selectively using the facts, figures and arguments as suiting your POV. The ratio of Soldiers income to Per Capita Income is not relevant. What needs to be measured is the position of the soldiers salary wrt the Household income in the country.

Here is the link to Household income in USA on wiki (quite long):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_ ... ted_States

Especially look at these graph:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Perso ... come_U.png

This graph shows the percentage of persons and households in each of the income groups shown

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Income-curve-$10k.png

This graph shows the percentage of the population per income groups $10,000 increments apart, except for the furthest two right columns which are separated by increments of $50,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:House ... _to_05.png

Median household income between 1965 and 2005. Graph by the US Census Bureau

The US Army pays its soldier in line with majority of its people earn. Further,in the salary figure that you quoted, you did not mention neither the allowances nor the bonuses available plus the education facility extended by the US Army in terms of loans and credits available to the serving men. Also, a US Army personnel stands to benefit in terms of Tax-allowances which are not available to IA or any Service.

Abhi_G · Post by **Abhi_G** » 31 Jan 2009 00:46

MohanG wrote:^^^

Compare the number of US soldiers and Indian soldiers who have died since 1947 - in wars or in counterinsurgency. You will realize their military's contribution to their nation is no less than our military's to our nation.

Circuitous argument. How is valour in the war theatre related to standard of living? I do not get the reason for a comparison with the US. Are you trying to say that since US army soldiers are badly paid in spite of their engagements (the figures are not showing that though) therefore IA should also be?

MohanG · Post by **MohanG** » 31 Jan 2009 01:32

rohitvats,

Yes, I excluded the benefits in both cases - US/India. But even if you include benefits, as Hari C does, the equation does change a little. (my example: India/US =3.5/0.6= 6; HariC's example: 6/2 = 3).

(1) HariC has not included various monetary allowances (for example children's education allowance of Rs 1000/child/month for 2 school going children.) available in India.

(2) DO NOT forget pension benefits to military personnel in India. In US, pension benefits are less liberal. About half of Central Government retirees are defence personnel, and pension liabilities are huge. {Incidentally for those cribbing about 'status', recent recruits to civil services DO NOT get public-funded pensions. It is they who should be cribbing. EDITED

However, considering average household incomes as a relevant measure does not change the situation much. If you take Hari C's data (without even including the education allowance / extra pension benefits as above):

Average Household income in India (2005) = approx. 62,000
Salary/Income ratio (India) = 250,000/62,000 = 4

Average Household income in US(2005) = 46,326
Salary/Income ratio (US) = 84793/46326 = 1.8

So the India/US ratio is 4/1.8 = 2.2

From the point of view of an average family, the Subedar in India is paid more than two times what his counterpart is paid in US in comparative terms.

Flaming edited.
Incidentally, your email ID violates forum rules and hence your account
has been suspended. You can re-activate your account with a valid email.
Rahul.

MohanG · Post by **MohanG** » 31 Jan 2009 01:44

Abhi_G,

No, I am trying to say (see my last post also), that in US as compared to an average household, the US soldier is paid well. In India as compared to an average household, the Indian soldier is paid much better.

The comparison of sacrifices was to address your point stated below that gave an impression that the contribution of our soldiers to our national interests is much more than the corresponding contribution of US soldiers to their national interests. Even though America's borders are safe, its armed forces have suffered far greater casualties than those suffered by our forces. So we should not dismiss their 'war readiness' or their state of 'being on guard' just because the dangers they face do not come from their neighbors.

Our soldiers are constantly on the border on the alert for offensive actions by the enemy and fighting terrorists within the country. Tell me 1 state in the US that is fighting insurgency.

The only time America fought an enemy force in a battle on its (American) land was close to 200 years ago with Canada (then known as British North America - the White House was burnt by the Canadians).

America is fortunate in its geographic location that it does not need the soldiers to be on constant guard. India is fortunate in its location very unfortunate in the neighbours that shares its borders.

HariC · Post by **HariC** » 31 Jan 2009 02:21

So the India/US ratio is 4/1.8 = 2.2

From the point of view of an average family, the Subedar in India is paid more than two times what his counterpart is paid in US in comparative terms.

MohanG,

this is nothing but madrassa mathematics when you are not taking into consideration 'standard of living'.

2.5 lakhs wont go far in india, while 86k is a fairly comfortable salary in the US . All the DOOs in the US know how much is 86k. no amount of obfuscation will convince anyone that a Subedar earning 2..5L per annum 'has it better' than someone earning 86K in the US.

as far as educational benefits go in india , then the same applies for the US Army. If we include the medical and housing benefits the US Army soldiers get, the amount would go beyond 100K.

Sanju · Post by **Sanju** » 31 Jan 2009 02:39

MohanG,

The US does not have a super class of civil administrators like the IAS. The IAS is a creation of the Brits, even then the comparison is tenuous.

Why in the first place are we comparing this India vs US? Let us get back to meaningful discussion. Continuing on this line of thought would amount to obfuscating the issue.

Guys, if we stop posting on this India vs US thingy it will die down.

BTW, does anyone know of Operation Torchlight that took place in early 1970?

Cheers,
Sanju

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 31 Jan 2009 03:13

$86k in US is a pretty good sum, and even in Bay area which high standard of living, the pay is a bit above average. Equivalent of $86k in India would be around 8-12lakh salary in India.

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 31 Jan 2009 03:39

OT - Statistics!

As US is the bench mark, let me relate a story my Stat professor loved to narrate at the begining of the semester.

A survey of the child births in a town in NJ revealed that Statistically significant numbers of babies were born in October to December.

Another survey in the same town regarding bird migration also revealed that statistically significant increase in the numbers of Storks in that town in the same period.
.
.
.
It was statistically proven that Storks bring babies...

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 31 Jan 2009 03:43

HariC wrote:
So the India/US ratio is 4/1.8 = 2.2

From the point of view of an average family, the Subedar in India is paid more than two times what his counterpart is paid in US in comparative terms.

MohanG,

this is nothing but madrassa mathematics when you are not taking into consideration 'standard of living'.

2.5 lakhs wont go far in india, while 86k is a fairly comfortable salary in the US . All the DOOs in the US know how much is 86k. no amount of obfuscation will convince anyone that a Subedar earning 2..5L per annum 'has it better' than someone earning 86K in the US.

as far as educational benefits go in india , then the same applies for the US Army. If we include the medical and housing benefits the US Army soldiers get, the amount would go beyond 100K.

Don't forget the 'tution aid' incentive for young recruits offered by US Army and USMC.

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 31 Jan 2009 03:46

rkhanna wrote:
Can somebody explain the highlighted part........what does he mean??
Lastly the NSG has never ever dealth with or trained for such a threat as what happened in bombay. In contrast NYPD ESU and others have repeatedly trained for Mass Urban Counter Terrorism in the past. Same goes with the SAS CT Unit. They routinely visit Important Structures all over the country and recce them incase in the future they need to "retake" it.

rkhanna, No unit repeat no unit has trained completely for what happened in Bombay nor have they ever faced such a situation (google for ex-SAS chief's comments in this regard). Just thank your stars it turned out the way it did and not infinitely worse. Right now I can list a whole lot of units who could do worse but cannot list anybody else who has done it better (since nobody has done it before). That being said yes, it can be done better but that is always true for this kind of operation. Yes, we need to fast track better equipment esp. air assets....this has been discussed a lot on B-R on the MARCOS thread and SF thread ever since 26/11. Yes NYPD ESU, SAS CRW (or whatever they call it nowadays) all train on MRTS, important buildings and all though I doubt they routinely visit important structures all over the country (if this is a fact and not merely your assertion, please provide some info). In case you didnt know, so does NSG (Delhi metro, Taj hotel in Delhi etc. come to mind). However, in a vast country like India how many important buildings are you going to individually train for?? Also dont forget SAS operates for UK which is a tiny country and NYPD is tasked with NYC which is also a 'tiny country'. OTOH NSG is a central force. And how many blue prints are you going to store? We have to change a whole lot of things before such a thing happens. Maybe the regional NSG hubs is the right step....lets see how it works out though.

Lastly. Maybe Just Maybe we need to Update/Improve even the simplest Skills such as RoomClearing, Stealthier Helo Insertions Etc. the NSG is GOOD. no doubt. But for along time they have remained Stangant and not continued to improve/ammend/Modify their Tactics.. They need further Exposure to Western/Foriegn Methodogy. IN the West GSG-9/GIGN/American SWAT Units/SEALs etc routinely meet and discuss new tactics and methodology. We need to start doing the same. Improve our Skill set and Improve out Technology.

This is a valid point and was echoed by an NSG officer. Such interactions definitely help. Dont be misled that the NSG doesnt update its tactics otherwise....it does pretty regularly and is very particular about it but having fresh outside insight always helps to a large extent. BTW American SWAT units dont routinely meet with GIGN/SEALs/SAS....different tasks....different capabilities...different responsibilities. At most what a SWAT unit can do is lay the groundwork for the pros to come in...this was found to be seriously lacking in bombay where there was a big vacuum between the time the terrorists struck and the time the MARCOS arrived.

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 31 Jan 2009 03:48

As as ex-statistics talib i can say statistics is definitely one of the arts of the 'spin' otherwise why would they teach you techniques called 'confounding'

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 31 Jan 2009 10:07

suryag wrote:Haric - while i totally agree that indian army is under paid, we should also consider facts pertaining to cost of living. I have lived in a cantonment and went to a kv and the cost was IIRC 18rs/3mnths. Accommodation in Military quarters was very cheap. I think some of these perks that military personnel enjoy(rightfully) should be considered before making a statement about cost of living.

Sanju,

Things had changed even when your father was in the Army.

The accommodation costs as per the GOI rules and it is as per the plinth area. It is the same for IAS or the Army. So does the electricity and water!

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 31 Jan 2009 10:57

Lastly the NSG has never ever dealth with or trained for such a threat as what happened in bombay. In contrast NYPD ESU and others have repeatedly trained for Mass Urban Counter Terrorism in the past. Same goes with the SAS CT Unit. They routinely visit Important Structures all over the country and recce them incase in the future they need to "retake" it.

Would our Govt or Human Rights allow this as appended below?

The New York authorities were scrambling to contain an angry backlash yesterday after police shot a group of three unarmed black men, killing one of them on his wedding day.

The shooting took place after a stag party at a strip club in Queens, a few hours before Sean Bell, 23, was due to marry the mother of his two small daughters. He was struck in the neck and arm and was dead on arrival at hospital.

One of his friends, Joseph Guzman, was in a critical condition after being hit 11 times, and another, Trent Benefield, was in a stable condition with wounds to his leg and buttocks.

Outrage at the shooting was compounded when it emerged that Mr Guzman and Mr Benefield had been shackled to their beds. New Yorkers have also been startled at the apparent wildness of the fusillade. The police claim to have overheard one of three men mention a gun, but no weapon was found.

The officers on the scene fired a total of 50 bullets, but fewer than half hit the intended target, a car carrying the three men, despite being fired at close range. The rest sprayed nearby cars and buildings, as local residents leapt out of bed and huddled on the floor. One of the stray bullets shattered a window at a train station in the neighbourhood, injuring two transport police officers with flying glass.

The shooting quickly became political with the appearance of community leaders - including the Reverend Al Sharpton, the black civil rights leader who has led previous protests against police brutality - alongside the victims' relatives outside the hospital where the wounded men were being treated. "I will stand with this family," Mr Sharpton said. "This stinks."

New York's mayor, Michael Bloomberg, urged patience, saying it was too early to draw conclusions. "We know that the officers on the scene had reason to believe an altercation involving a firearm was about to happen and were trying to stop it," he said.

Richard Brown, the borough's district attorney, promised a "full, fair and complete investigation".

New York officials' greatest fear is a repeat of the Amadou Diallo affair in 1999, from which the city's race relations took years to recover. Diallo was a Guinean immigrant who was killed in a hail of 41 police bullets after he reached for his wallet at the entrance to his block of flats. The four white officers involved in that incident were all acquitted of wrongdoing........
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/no ... lianborger

No Trial For Dorismond Shooter
Officer Anthony Vasquez Won't Face Criminal Charges
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/03/ ... 6270.shtml

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 31 Jan 2009 11:54

The discussion on whether the "army is paid enough" is a bit stale. I am yet to see anyone, whether in the govt, services or the pvt sector, who thinks he is "paid enough".

The larger question is whether the country is "investing" enough in its military, and the attendant military industrial complex, to commensurate with the aspirations of an emerging power..That question IMHO cannot be answered by talking of pay parity and comparing income levels of the jawan with someone else. Structurally, the current defence budget, even after "pensions" has been taken out of the defence head, has about 60%+ allocated to salaries etc..is there scope for increasing the share of the budget "pie"?Maybe, but dont think by a whole lot. Such situations call for structural changes in the way the services operate. This includes alternative methods of organisation, recruitment, compensation etc.

A very lively discussion took place on this a few "pages" back..But seems the issue is back. Unfortunately we can try (and cry) as much as we want to - but breast beating about pay parity and insufficient salaries is not going to cut it ever I am afraid..

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 31 Jan 2009 12:47

Somnath,

There is one aspect that you fail to understand and that is, the army officer is forced to maintain a standard becoming of an officer.

He has to maintain a spic and span home. If you have relatives in the Forces, you will understand. He cannot paste newspaper on his windows for privacy or have a toilet that is dirty. Or, have his house unkempt or invite guest and then serve chanachur! I agree it is cosmetic, but then that is how it is! Or move around his house in a lungi! Appearance contribute to leadership! And it costs money. Imagine an unshaven, unwashed, Laloo/ Shibu Soren type of a joker ordering his troops into a battle! I am not aware as to what you do, but should you come to office in the same dirty underwear without any clothes on, would your subordinates respond even if you were the CEO?! Appearances matter!

In civil, one can just get rid of his guest by giving him merely water. Not so in the Army. Just not done! If the guest comes in the evening, the mandatory glass of whiskey (actually not less than two, since one is for the enemy) has to be given. You will say cheap alcohol. I will only suggest to you that we pay all taxes for what we buy in the Canteen. It appears to be cheap since the stuff comes directly from the Industry to the Consumer and hence the profit of the middle man, like the area distributor and retailer etc are not there!

The cash that one gets is not an issue. It is the question of PARITY and equated with the circumstances and effects of office!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 31 Jan 2009 14:21

@Somnath: I was a spectator to the "lively" debate that you refer to and it did not throw up any implementable idea except for sophisticated arguments bereft of logic and reason.

Before you make statement as "This includes alternative methods of organisation, recruitment, compensation etc. ", it would be pertinent if you/any one on the forum can comment on the follwing
1.Present structure
2.Deficiences in the structure
3. Remedial measures and how they'll implemented
4. Quantum of the onus on the IA to carry change within

In the meanwhile, it is important to understand three important points:

a. You need the number of men that you have as of now. No matter what "structure" you refer to, the number of men will remain the same. Infact, it might actually increase with the planned new raisings for the Western and Eastern Borders. There is only that much re-alignment of existing troops/formations that you can do.
b. And these men need to be paid. And paid enough for the services to remain an attractive career options because nationalism and patriotism alone does not feed the stomach.
c. As for the parity issue, tell me if it is not so important, why have it then? Why is the IAS lobby using every trick in the book to sabotage the demand for parity by the Services?

As for:

The larger question is whether the country is "investing" enough in its military, and the attendant military industrial complex, to commensurate with the aspirations of an emerging power..That question IMHO cannot be answered by talking of pay parity and comparing income levels of the jawan with someone else.

Invest as much you may in MIC, unless you have the right kind of people and motivated at that, all the fancy-shmancy stuff will be of no use. It will be interesting to read the amount of financial incentive that was introduced by the US DOD for attracting and maintaining the right troop level.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 31 Jan 2009 16:16

rohitvats wrote:@Somnath: I was a spectator to the "lively" debate that you refer to and it did not throw up any implementable idea except for sophisticated arguments bereft of logic and reason.

Before you make statement as "This includes alternative methods of organisation, recruitment, compensation etc. ", it would be pertinent if you/any one on the forum can comment on the follwing
1.Present structure
2.Deficiences in the structure
3. Remedial measures and how they'll implemented
4. Quantum of the onus on the IA to carry change within

In the meanwhile, it is important to understand three important points:

a. You need the number of men that you have as of now. No matter what "structure" you refer to, the number of men will remain the same. Infact, it might actually increase with the planned new raisings for the Western and Eastern Borders. There is only that much re-alignment of existing troops/formations that you can do.
b. And these men need to be paid. And paid enough for the services to remain an attractive career options because nationalism and patriotism alone does not feed the stomach.
c. As for the parity issue, tell me if it is not so important, why have it then? Why is the IAS lobby using every trick in the book to sabotage the demand for parity by the Services?

As for:
The larger question is whether the country is "investing" enough in its military, and the attendant military industrial complex, to commensurate with the aspirations of an emerging power..That question IMHO cannot be answered by talking of pay parity and comparing income levels of the jawan with someone else.
Invest as much you may in MIC, unless you have the right kind of people and motivated at that, all the fancy-shmancy stuff will be of no use. It will be interesting to read the amount of financial incentive that was introduced by the US DOD for attracting and maintaining the right troop level.

I dont think you do full justice to the discussion that took place...A few of the ideas that were discussed (from memory):

1. An expanded SSC - have a larger cadre of SSC officers, a smaller one of an "elite" permanent cadre. Over time, this would enable the services to pay vastly "better" for its permanent cadre, therefby attracting better quality people..Coincidentally of course, soon after this discussion, there were news reports about the Army considering a vastly expanded SSC infrastructure!

2. Discussion on a a system of golden handshakes and handcuffs

3. Some discussion on manpower rationalisation possibilities, especially in line with the recos of the Arun Singh committee report as well as new realities..

So there were a few things discussed, if you dont them, pls present alternatives!

there are other things as well - for example, the ultimate holy cow, "size" of the Army..With a lot of CI duties now being taken up by CPMFs, are theere ways to rightsize the Army? Before Kargil, there was a modest plan of reducing the strength by 50k, but it died a natural death after Kargil..There might be opportunities for the IA to present plans for reduced numbers coupled with using the savings to induct technological force multipliers...

I agree with you on the point that the man is the most important variable in any organisation. And I have also made the point many times that services is a professsion, and we need to treat it as that..The attempt should be to make the services competitively attractive vis a vis other choices that the young men of today have..And the Indian youth has much greater materialistic aspirations than pay parities, at least the "city crowd" I grew up amongst. The IAS lobby clings to it because it is living in the past, its a decayed insttituion now - decaying further every year under the burden of a 50% quota - bunch of complete nincompoops whose only qualification has been to have the right caste...Includes many of the IIT-ians who come to the IAS now..

If the Army offers a better "package" materially, IMHO most aspriing youngsters wouldnt care about rank parities..

RayC, what makes you think that some sort of a social standing does not have to be maintained by the civilian public servant? And what he gets paid is enough, relatively speaking? That somehow the civilians can get away with chanachur while the servicemen have to arrange for whisky? I hate basing an argument on the basis of personal anecdotes - but I have relations both in the services and in the civilian services...Its equally difficulat for the civilians!!
I am the first to agree that the Forces deserve better, in terms of both quality of people that they attract as well as in terms of compensation..But the discussion, at least at the level of the "brass", needs to be to undertake the "reforms" structurally rather than agitate over pay parity..

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 31 Jan 2009 18:33

Army battles fake domicile certificate menace in Gujarat.

Poor response to the Army recruitment drives has become a norm in Gujarat. But more alarming is the tendency of the aspirants to lie about their domicile status to get a berth in the Army from the state, according to the Army recruitment authorities.
In the recently conducted recruitment drive, post-26/11 Mumbai attack, a whopping 30,000 aspirants turned up in Ahmedabad, but barely 2,000 cleared the screening. “This was roughly three times more than the usual representation in recruitment rallies until 2008,” said Colonel S P Sharma, director (Recruitment).

But while scrutinising the documents, the Army found that 30 per cent of them had lied about their domicile status in their certificates. Most of the candidates originally belonged to Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Rajasthan.

The apprehensions of the Army recruitment authorities were strengthened last year, when two sets of Bengali youths made an attempt to join the Army from the state. This had happened during the Godhra and Bharuch Army recruitment rallies respectively held in January and August last year.

"These youths claimed to be Bengalis settled in Gujarat for a decade, but disappeared when we started scrutinising their domicile certificates. The respective district police were intimated, but in vain,” said a senior officer involved in the Army recruitment rallies in Gujarat.

Citing another incident, the officer said that during screening, a youth from Rajasthan, who had passed his SSC and HSC exams in 2005 and 2007 respectively, had a domicile certificate issued from the Anand district collector's officer affirming that he had lived in Gujarat for the last 10 years. The Army authorities are now double checking it with the Anand district authorities.

Alarmed at this tendency, the Army has now taken up the matter with Chief Minister Narendra Modi as well as the state home secretary, and sought an intervention over the issue of domicile certificates.

“On an average, over 30 per cent of youths recruited from Gujarat are non-Gujaratis, but we found that they had domicile certificates issued by the concerned authorities in the state,” said Col. Sharma. He added this is being viewed seriously, as there is a possibility of a foreign national or an anti-national trying to make his way into the Army by taking advantage of this laxity.

After taking over office in Gujarat in June 2007, Col. Sharma has until now shot several

Authorities plan two-tier check
The Army authorities are now suggesting a set of two formats of domicile certificates for Gujarat in order to weed out the menace of fake domicile certificates. In Gujarat, domicile certificates are issued by the mamlatdar at the taluka (block level), which in reality can be easily sought after bribing the lower level officials. To prevent this, the Army recruitment authorities intend to introduce a new format for the state. Under this, instead of simply seeking domicile certificate, the aspirants will have to specify their birth place with state details, for how long they have been staying in Gujarat and at what addresses. The Army recruitment authorities are also mulling over getting police verification in case of Army aspirants to double check their domicile status.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 01 Feb 2009 04:12

@Somnath: I did take the time to go through the posts and give them thought. Hence, the opinion was not made on the fly. Please allow me to present my POV on the issue:

Expanding the SSC Base:

Before we proceed, let’s understand the present nature of the SSC scenario.The SSC was/is used to plug the holes in the Permanent Commission (PC) cadre due to any shortfall. Please remember that, since the SSC Officer has the option of leaving, the IA will have to start with the assumption that all of the SSC Officers will leave and hence, cannot budget its manpower for higher level on SSC numbers in any way. A SSC officer could apply for PC before the expiry of his tenure (5years). Provided he had a good record and given the vacancy in the PC cadre, officer were granted PC (SSC officers loose one year seniority on attaining the PC compared to similar timed batches from IMA). Later, as the Officer shortage hit the IA, almost all the SSC officer could hope to get the PC, save for those who’d really screwed up. The situation now is such that more than 50% of the batch of SSC officers is opting out from the IA for greener pastures. So, even that option is not available to the IA. This is especially true of the batches which came in late 90s and early 2000. They were in the midst of the massive economic boom and chose the corporate sector.

Another important point to be borne in mind is that people do not opt for OTA/SSC because they want to retain the flexibility of opting out after 5 years. Save for those who are from Defence background or have relatives, people have no clue about the working of IA. Hence, they can’t be expected to take such (opting for SSC) a well informed decision. The biggest reason is that OTA was considered as backdoor entry into IA. If you’re appearing for CDS examination and opt for OTA, you’re exempted from taking the Quant Section of the exam (which is a big-big worry factor for most aspirants). Also, guys who apply for IMA always for sure tick the OTA as option. The reason being, if you do not do well in the Quant Section but have otherwise good marks, the candidate can be considered for OTA also. So, it is the same crop of people who apply for both the PC/SSC. Whether you want to attract them for SSC/PC, you’ll have to pay them well. There is no two ways about it.

The Elite vs. The Grunt Job guys:

You’ve brought forth the argument about creating an ‘Elite’ group of relatively favourably paid PC officers who are groomed for higher leadership. All the while, the SSC officers undertake the ‘grunt’ work, are paid less and go their way post the SSC time frame. Can you elaborate what can be classified as ‘grunt’ work? For a young subaltern, commanding a platoon, what would be grunt and elite work? Is establishing ambush better profile task than being a ROP (Road Opening Party) commander? The thing is, whatever be the job at hand, everything is important from the perspective of learning, so that the officer can learn the nuances of the trade and become a good leader of his men. And what about the impact of such a division on the morale and cohesion of the officer corps? How can one set of officer corps be superior to the other?

Practicality of SSC expansion:

Let’s evaluate the practical aspect of the suggestion with an example:

1. Each Infantry unit has an authorized strength of 21+1 (attached-RMO) officers.

2.The division of this strength between various ranks may look like this (this is a guess estimate, please provide more accurate info if someone has one; RayC Sir?):
Col/Lt.Col/Majors (Senior-Junior: 12-6years)/Captains (Senior-Junior: 2-5years)/Lt.: 1/1/5/8/6

3.Now assume, our Infantry Unit is part of a Regiment of 10 battalions.

4.In all, they’ll be 50 posts to be filled by Majors (various seniorities) and 80 to be filled by Captains (differing seniorities).
The staff appointments/Instruction level requirement for each level has not been considered.

5.Since, SSC Officers leave service at the end of 5years, to fill the 50 post held by Major rank officer(6years of service required), you’ll need at the minimum 50 Captains from PC Cadre. This is 63% of the total strength at Captain Level. The PC cadre will always remain a majority.

So net of all, you can't do away with the PC cadre. It is and will remain your majority component of the Officer Corps. The SSC segment can be brought up, but only that much, the extension of OTA being an example. Bit IMHO, this gain is temporary measure to fill up/reduce the present vacancy level. Again, one is assuming that more people will opt for OTA/SSC (I surely do not know why they would).

Mohan G · Post by **Mohan G** » 01 Feb 2009 08:33

Hello All,

I am back, with a little change of name: just some administrative problems with Admins.

I think another round of SSC vs PC debate is about to start. But, let me respond to some views posted earlier.

HariC wrote:
So the India/US ratio is 4/1.8 = 2.2

From the point of view of an average family, the Subedar in India is paid more than two times what his counterpart is paid in US in comparative terms.

MohanG,

this is nothing but madrassa mathematics when you are not taking into consideration 'standard of living'.

2.5 lakhs wont go far in india, while 86k is a fairly comfortable salary in the US . All the DOOs in the US know how much is 86k. no amount of obfuscation will convince anyone that a Subedar earning 2..5L per annum 'has it better' than someone earning 86K in the US.

as far as educational benefits go in india , then the same applies for the US Army. If we include the medical and housing benefits the US Army soldiers get, the amount would go beyond 100K.

My basic point remains unchanged: what is our ability to pay?

The argument is true both for civil and military public servants.

Let me give an example:

Say the Sgt Major in US is unhappy with his pay and complains to the average householder Joe. Now Joe will say, "Sir, we respect your service to the nation and the sacrifices you are making. We will try to provide you with more. But please remember that each year you get 80% more than what my family earns. Plus you get some extra benefits. So you will understand why it may be difficult for me to pay you more."

Now, the Subedar in India is also unhappy with his pay and complains to the average householder Kishan. Kishan may say, "Sir, we respect your service to the nation and the sacrifices you are making. We will try to provide you with more. But please remember that each year you get 300% more than what my family earns. Plus you get some extra benefits. So you will understand why it may be difficult for me to pay you more."

You may call this logic madarssa maths.

We have to see things in context. We cannot compare the living standards of Sgt Major and Subedar. Of course, Sgt Major will have a better life style. But so do scientists, technicians, sweepers, postmen, teachers, and almost all public servants in US as compared to their Indian counterparts. The same is true for almost all private employees. We are a relatively poor nation and our tax to GDP ratio is about half of that of advanced nations, so the disparity in the ability to pay will remain.

sunilUpa wrote:It was statistically proven that Storks bring babies...

This is an example of "Correlation does not prove causation". My reasoning stated above does not seem to have this flaw.

Ray C wrote:The accommodation costs as per the GOI rules and it is as per the plinth area. It is the same for IAS or the Army. So does the electricity and water!

The question is not of the IAS or Army. The question is whether the accommodation provided by the Government is cheaper than the market rate. I will say yes. Very much so. Sometimes 2 to 3 times cheaper. Sometimes more.

Ray C wrote:There is one aspect that you fail to understand and that is, the army officer is forced to maintain a standard becoming of an officer.

With due respect, I must also take exception to this line of argument. It implies that an ISRO scientist or an IIT professor can get rid of a visitor by offering water and chanachur, but not an Army Major. The civilians (including a Forest DFO or a BSF commander or a Railway General Manager) can afford to dress and live shabbily without any consequences for their work-effectiveness (leave apart the question of attracting and retaining talent for the civilian sector), but not so for the Colonel or Group Captain.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 01 Feb 2009 08:41

Or move around his house in a lungi!

Err what is wrong with this???

Mohan G · Post by **Mohan G** » 01 Feb 2009 09:02

^^^

IMO, nothing is wrong in wearing a lungi at home. Same with kurta-pajama or kurta-dhoti or any of our traditional dresses.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 01 Feb 2009 10:02

Before Kargil, there was a modest plan of reducing the strength by 50k, but it died a natural death after Kargil.

I presume you are referring to the Chandrasekar Committee. The reduction was going on and then Kargil happened and the Army nearly got reduced and the country nearly shrunk!

The requirement of pioneers and the AT was sorely felt during Kargil and civilians were inducted to do the job of the pioneers with a great drop in efficiency.

So, it is was a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul and cutting the nose to spite the face!

Harebrained schemes to please the govt and its penchant for cutting costs.

Rightsizing indeed!

Bureaucratic buggers muddle.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 01 Feb 2009 10:15

With due respect, I must also take exception to this line of argument. It implies that an ISRO scientist or an IIT professor can get rid of a visitor by offering water and chanachur, but not an Army Major. The civilians (including a Forest DFO or a BSF commander or a Railway General Manager) can afford to dress and live shabbily without any consequences for their work-effectiveness (leave apart the question of attracting and retaining talent for the civilian sector), but not so for the Colonel or Group Captain.

I am afraid an officer cannot move around his house shabbily. His orderly and others who may come to the house will observe that he is no better than them and it will become a lunger gup and will affect this effectiveness in command as he will no be an example to his men.

On Commissioning, my CO told me thus:

"Roy, how many eyes do you have?"

"Two, Sir" I replied.

"Good, now tell me what is the approximate strength of the Battalion?"

"Approximately 800, sir".

"So, sixteen hundred eyes will be watching you night and day. Hence, do not do anything which will make you fall from grace!"

That sums it up!

The DFO or ISRO scientist is not commanding any body. The BSF officer, too, has many eyes watching him everyday and on his decision will rest their fate and life or death!

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 01 Feb 2009 10:22

Surya wrote:Or move around his house in a lungi!

Err what is wrong with this???

THE SAFAIWALA

My battalion, after a stint in Operation Intrusion Dalunang in the Kargil High Altitude Sector had come down to Hyderabad in 1990. Obviously, the officers were rather keen to get married accommodation at the earliest. It took us about four months before we could get some accommodation in spite of having ‘field seniority’.

We were lucky that we got the accommodation in four months, that too spanking new! We were in such a hurry that even before the contractor could clean up the rooms, we accepted in as they do in an ‘as is where is’ auction.

No matter how much our safaiwalas [janitors] had washed the floors of the dust and grime, they remained stacked with unending layers. I am not the one to give up and so the next Sunday, I got bare bodied and in a lungi [sarong] started washing the floor, ably assisted by my man Friday.

The orderly had swilled the floor of the drawing room with pails of water and had gone somewhere. I was mopping the floor with a long handled mop, when the door bell rang.

I went to the door and opened it. Outside, stood a person, who appeared to be an officer. I was not too pleased. It was a Sunday and whoever it was, should have telephoned me before coming. I would have at least got dressed appropriate for an officer, that too, a Commanding Officer.

Before I could say any thing, the officer most haughtily said in Hindi, “Sah’b ghar men hai? (Is the sahib at home?]”

I was dying to say, ‘No’. I was a Commanding Officer [CO] and I was a bit surprised at the overbearing attitude from someone who looked a junior officer. I had forgotten that I was bare bodied and in a lungi.

Yet one cannot be rude. Therefore, I told him purposely in Hindi and not in English as one would have normally done, “Ap andar aiye [Please come in]”.

The officer entered and was a trifle befuddled at finding the drawing room in a mess with chairs strewn all around and water over the floor. Obviously, such a shamble could not be a Commanding Officer’s house.

Seeing his disorientation, I politely said in English, “Do sit down”’

“Kamaal ke baat. Agrezi bolta ha! Kya Yeh kia CO sah’b ke ghar? {Extraordinary. Talking in English! Is this the CO Sahib’s house]”, queried the officer of me, looking mostly sceptically around the room.

I was still oblivious that I was bare bodied and in a lungi. I always imagined that I had a personality which instantly indicated that I was a person of authority. Obviously, this person was just being obtuse and that too on a day when I had no time to poddlefake.

“Indeed, this is the CO’s house and I am the CO”, I said rather pompously, thinking that would put him in his place.

“Angrezi bolta hai?!! Kia bakwas, aj kal sab hi apne ap ko CO soch ta hai [Speaking in English?!! What tommy rot. These days, every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he is the CO].”

That really shook me.

“No, I am the CO”, I said in an insisting and defensive tone.

“Bakwas band karo. Apna aukat bholo nahin. Ajib ke baat hai ki safaiwala log aj kal apne apko CO soch rahe hai. [Don’t talk rubbish. Don’t forget you station. It’s extraordinary that these days sweepers consider themselves as COs]”

The officer looked at his watch as if in a hurry and ordered me, “Andar jao aur memsah’b ko bola ke lao [Go inside and call the lady of the house].” It is then that I comprehended that I was bare bodied and in a lungi.

I realised that it was futile to argue with this officer and so I went inside and explained the situation to my wife.

My wife came out and introduced herself and then both of us sat, side by side, on the sofa, out of sheer habit.

The officer was thunderstruck! He gulped a couple of time and then blurted out in sheer disbelief, “Madam, how is the safaiwala sitting next to you? These chaps are getting real audacious these days. This egalitarianism will lead us to our doom as far as discipline is concerned”

I had not briefed my wife that the officer had been persistently mistaking me for the safaiwala. Hence, she looked confused.

“What safaiwala? Where is he?” my wife asked thoroughly bewildered, looking around herself.

“Madam, I am meaning the safaiwala sitting right next to you now.”

She burst out into peals of laughter. “Oh him? He is no safaiwala. He is my husband and he is the CO of the unit. Anyway, it serves him right. He is a cleanliness faddist. I told him to leave it to the safaiwala but he wanted to do it himself and that too in a lungi with nothing on top!! Serves him right.”

It may have thrilled my wife that I had been sorted out, but the officer turned pale. He had called me a safaiwala and I turned out to be a CO!

“Sorry, sir. I did not realise that you are the CO. You must forgive me. My confusion is but genuine. After all, a self respecting CO normally does not wear a lungi and is bare bodied, let alone clean the floor himself!”

He had now really had me. Indirectly, he told me that I was not self respecting and not fit to be a CO. I was also sure that if I quizzed him more, he would say, as they always do when they make a faux pas, that their English is poor.

He realised that he should not have used the words ‘self respecting’ and so, dot on target it came. “Sorry sir, my English is poor. What I meant was that no CO would be in the state of dress, if indeed we can call it dress, as you, sir.” Again, he had me! Before further damage, he continued in the same breath, “I must say that you are a ‘hands on’ CO.”

I will confess I was not terribly thrilled with what this officer said. In the meantime, tea and sandwiches were served by my wife to the officer.

I wanted to get rid of this officer and get on with my floor cleaning.

“Right, how can I help you this Sunday?” I said, emphasising on ‘Sunday’, with the implicit message that he was wasting the day for me.

“Nothing, sir. I have just been posted to the unit and so I thought I should pay my regards to you.” That surprised me. We had no official intimation.

“Sure? We know nothing of this”, I said.

“I don’t know about that, sir. I have given the movement order to the office this morning. I came here personally so that before you heard it on the grapevine I thought I must tell you myself. My last CO initiated the AFMSF 10 [the form for psychiatric check] on me. I requested a posting out and so I have been posted out to your unit.” This demoralised me further. As it is, I had my hands full with all sorts of chaps and here comes the coup de grâce, so to say!

I made light of it. If a CO did not dress like a CO, with his suit and bow tie on, whether he was cleaning the floor or not, what difference did it make if a psychiatric officer was posted in or not.

To make light of the affair and to put the officer at ease, I said, “Not to worry, old chap. It’s great that you are a psychiatric case. You have come to the right place. I am also psychiatric, though not officially declared. We will have a ball.”

“I know that, sir, that you are also a little odd. Your last Brigade Commander, who is a relation of mine, told me so. He said that I would be in the right company.”

That really floored me and I forgot all about cleaning the floor!

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 01 Feb 2009 11:40

RayC wrote:
Before Kargil, there was a modest plan of reducing the strength by 50k, but it died a natural death after Kargil.
I presume you are referring to the Chandrasekar Committee. The reduction was going on and then Kargil happened and the Army nearly got reduced and the country nearly shrunk!

The requirement of pioneers and the AT was sorely felt during Kargil and civilians were inducted to do the job of the pioneers with a great drop in efficiency.

So, it is was a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul and cutting the nose to spite the face!

Harebrained schemes to please the govt and its penchant for cutting costs.

Rightsizing indeed!

Bureaucratic buggers muddle.

The question is whether there are imaginative ways of doing things. While I am not an "insider", so wont know all the nitty gritties, quite a few developments have happened since Kargil:

1. CI in the cities of Kashmir has been entrusted to CPMFs
2. Rashtriya Rifles has increasinly taken up CI duties in the rural areas, and from 1998 the budget of Rashtriya Rifles has been shifted out of the Defence Budget. http://mod.nic.in/samachar/16feb01/html/trish.htm

Are there ways of converting RR into a permanent para military organisation, but under the operational command of the Army? Something like the Assam Rifles..Given that the RR budget is already being borne by the Home Ministry, this would lso "free up" an equivalent number of troops from the ambit of Army pensions and benefits. Further, it would give "permanency" to RR, something that successive Army Chiefs have been asking for..

@ Rohitvats

The SSC-PC mix is a bit like the permanent cadre and "national servicemen" in a host of other countries - Israel, Singapore etc..How does SSC help? Consider the following points:

1. The nos of "brass" quality people you need is relatively few, in fact fewer than the sanctioned strength of Maj Gens/Lt Gens/Brigadiers or Colonels, and certainly less than what AV Singh committee suggests.

2. The real shortage is in the level of Captains and Majors.

3. The IA is not able to, because of various well enumertaed reasons, the "right quality" for the few that need to graduate to higher things.

SSC fits the bill in multiple ways..About 80% of the officer corps will be Lt Col and below..The skills required for most jobs at these levels (commanding a platoon, company or battalion) would not require uniform "brass quality" talent..Say you staff 60% of these ranks by the SSC. You immediately save on pension and other retirement benefits of almost 50% of the officer corps...Some of it you upfront and monetise for a "golden handshake" for the SSC folks, so that it prepares them for a next life after ARmy.

Second, you can then have a "leaner" higher officer cadre - with appropriate ranks for jobs..No need for Colonels to command battalions, and LT Gens to command Divisions..You save further costs by having a leaner "top brass"...

The savings from both can be utilised to significantly up the "package" for the smaller permanent cadre, who would have better proabilities (than now) of graduating into higher ranks, get better monetary benefits and be at the cutting edge for the Army's new tech initiatives..

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 01 Feb 2009 12:31

The impasse over this pay parity issue is gettign hilarious

http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/index ... =in&latn=2

I wished the services brass got themselves agitated over the larger issues of defence management and reforms - the results would have been far better.........

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 01 Feb 2009 12:42

mohan, please, an army and a people's movement runs on completely different aspects of motivation. while in a movement the personal charisma of the leader is everything, in an army a major part of leadership is upholding the institution.

I'm removing the above OT posts.

Mohan G · Post by **Mohan G** » 01 Feb 2009 13:09

^^^ I am not debating your right to remove the post, though I wish you had let other people make their judgment, especially as the post wasn't abusive or totally unrelated.

My point is that leadership is a function of inherent character, of what a person is, not of what clothes he wears. Can Shah Rukh Khan lead a popular movement? If yes, for how long? What about Aishwarya Rai?

IMHO we should discount the notion that officers cannot be 'at ease' when at home, or that it is somehow 'inappropriate' to wear traditional dresses like 'lungi' or 'dhoti' at home. IMHO this is a colonial notion. I would be the last one to ask for getting rid of so-called 'colonial notions' if doing so hampers efficiency, however not wearing lungi or dhoti purposely so that the subordinates do not think ill of the officers hurts my nationalistic pride deeply. What next, should south indian officers not eat with their fingers and instead use cutlery even at home?

We need to respect our traditions, our native clothes, our native cultures.