We are really hurt

WE REALLY ARE HURT.

Mr Shekhar Gupta,
It is only the army which walks the talk!
Remember that for now and forever. It's the Honour of the Uniform!

Letter to the editor of the Indian Express

Dear Mr. Shekhar Gupta,

While your reluctant apology was at best confusing, your tom-tomming the 'soldier's paper' surely cut a sorry figure. I only wish that along with the details of generous donations that your employees have made in memory of the fallen, you also informed readers of the sons and daughters of IE employees who have joined the Nation's Armed Forces. Anyway, I write to you assuming you still believe yours is a 'soldier's paper'.I must admit that I am a diehard fan of the genre of reporting that your paper always stands for.

I am sure the Chiefs understood the import of the option of refusing a cabinet decision before exercising that option including the permanent damage to the forces, unprecedented as it was. Actually, I believe they were indeed thinking of the future when they took the decision! Your analysis of the consequences of not stirring the political executive, I am afraid, was less than enthusiastic, if at all.

I also believe the Chiefs' protest is purely for equivalence and status. Money is something most are ashamed to even suggest, let alone protest about, sincebargaining is still considered 'un-officer like'. Status on the other hand is something for which they may probably do more than merely mildly protest.There are valid reasons for this seemingly peculiar and 'undisciplined' behavior.I will try to explain the centrality of the idea of IZZAT - that the English word 'honour' approximates.

To help me in this endeavour, you may like to imagine having been asked to lead your employees to their probable deaths. I believe the talk of 'merely a point of order' in 'It's the uniform' must not be trivialized. And while I have no intention of sounding alarmist, I recount an old episode to try to explain the bottom line of professional soldiering.

Towards the end of the '65 stalemate in the Lahore Sector, a correspondent happened to ask the Commanding Officer (CO) of 3 JAT, a unit which had just got the better of a Pakistani battalion in a bloody battle (3 JAT lost 5 officers and 90 men on the night of 21/22 Sep while the Pak battalion lostabout 300 dead and rest captured including their CO), as to what made the men fight such a gruesome battle? The correspondent, eagerly, without waiting for an answer hastily added that it must have been the love of their country. Lt Col Desmond Hayde, the CO, pointing to his No 2, said, 'You see Major Shekhawat? He fights because he holds nothing dearer than the respect and standing he enjoys in the eyes of his men, family, and community back home.. His fear of losing that standing overcomes his fear of death. The men, of course, fight because Major Shekhawat fights.'

The idea, at the core, is therefore rather simple. You place the leader on such a pedestal that losing that place is all that he fears. The followers follow because they see the 'highly placed fellow' fighting fearlessly (seemingly, at least). Now, if you belittle his protests of his degradation of status (and worse - tell him that he is getting paid more than he deserves, worse still - egg him on that he has lost discipline and honour for having the temerity to even protest his degradation, worst of all - deny him any channel and means to protest), then you are in effect directly and surely denuding the fighting capability of the nation's Armed Forces. There is no dearth of lecherous (and stronger than India) countries in the dog eat dog world.

Mr. Gupta, I implore you do two things:-

1) Read the Chetwode Motto carefully: 'The safety, honour and welfare of your country come first, always and every time.The honour, welfare and comfort of the men you command come next.Your own ease, comfort and safety come last, Always and every time.Note that the honour of the men comes next to the Nation itself and within the priorities of the men, honour comes before welfare or comfort. Note thatthe honour of the Gentlemen Cadet being commissioned doesn't figure anywhere in the motto. So where is the leader's honour? The motto itself, of course! Is his honour divided between the Nation's and that of his men? Who fights for his honour? I like to think that people like you, the Cabinet and the people of this country fight for the military leader's honor.
2) Please read and assess for yourself the import of what successive pay commissions have done to that honor? Can we expect some genuine research from a paper famous for it? Can we expect the IE to kick-off a genuine national debate instead of allowing lowly lobbyists to dangerously sensationalize the limited space in print and TV?

With best wishes and a Happy Diwali.

Regards,

The Armed Forces