Agnipath might have adverse consequences
The government this week announced a recruitment model, Agnipath, for the short-term induction of personnel into the armed forces. As a veteran, who has worn the nation’s uniform with pride for 41 years, I wish the new scheme all success. But due to my loyalty to my motherland, shared by all veterans, I also have some misgivings about the new recruitment programme.
There is no doubt that the RussiaUkraine war will have repercussions on our geopolitically stressed region, with a hostile China already creating trouble. In such a situation, this, perhaps, was not the right time to undertake radical measures such as Agnipath. That this so-called transformative scheme has met with criticism from many veterans should not be brushed aside.
Among the positive reactions in the media, two stand out: The scheme will open the gates for fresh talent and reduce the mammoth pension bill. While a prudent pruning of non-critical defence expenditure may be in order, the grave ramifications of reducing the manpower strength of the armed forces must be holistically addressed.
The strength of the Indian military is around 1.5 million, while that of civilians in the ministry of defence is approximately 375,000. However, their pension in proportionate terms is much more than those of the military. Civilians and the police personnel retire at the age of 58 and end up drawing much higher pensions than those in the military who, by and large, retire between 35-37 years. The average annual defence civilian pension is roughly ₹5.38 lakh versus ₹1.38 lakh for military pensioners, due to the longer career spans of the former.
Since the security considerations of the nation are sacrosanct even in this technology-driven age, only highly motivated and well-trained personnel of the armed forces must man the troops, not shortterm soldiers, or agniveers, who may only be waiting to finish their four-year stint and move on to greener pastures. Hence, a pilot project would have been a more prudent step.
Serving the Army is a calling; joining it is far beyond seeking mere employment. Regrettably, our civilian brethren cannot fathom why Indian soldiers — acknowledged one of the best in the world — willingly lay down their life following their young leader in combat. It is because of the Indian Army’s centuries-old hallowed tradition of “naam, namak, nishan,” which means faith in the name of his unit, salt (pledging loyalty to it), and the unit flag. And the ultimate loyalty is, of course, to the motherland. Can you replace an Indian soldier with a semi-trained and not-somotivated person who is just waiting to complete his four years under the new scheme?
There are many examples of armies with short-tenure soldiers falling in battle. For example, American soldiers in Vietnam and Russian soldiers in Ukraine. The performance of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) troops in Afghanistan is also a telling example of demotivated soldiers.
It takes a soldier a long time to emotionally and physically get moulded into his unit groove, become infused with his unit’s ethos and, thus, be prepared to lay down his life for the unit’s honour. A soldier is not a watchman but has to master many skills: Weapons, communications, diverse equipment, fieldcraft and tactics. Mastering these skills takes time. The Indian armed force is a noble institution that has been at the forefront in preserving the nation’s honour and security. Being the first responders to any challenge and as the last bastion of the State, its manpower requirements, both qualitatively and quantitatively, have to be adequately met, notwithstanding any financial constraints.