Preserve the pluralistic ethos of the Army
The professionalism, pluralistic ethos and apolitical nature of the Army are widely recognised. Maintaining this institutional ozone layer is imperative to sustain the normative rhythms of a vibrant democracy
In the fortnight preceding Eid, the Indian Army dealt with a social media assault on its pluralistic ethos in a deft manner after an initial fumble. To recapitulate briefly — the Army’s public relations officer (PRO) in Jammu put out a tweet in late-April about an iftar party that the local formation had held; this was a routine matter that would have been of interest, at best, to the local community. However, this innocuous tweet by the Army rep led to an offensive remark by a TV anchor known for his anti-Muslim orientation and hate-speech diatribes, wherein the latter sarcastically queried (April 21) on Twitter: “Ab yeh bimari bharaatiya sena may bhi ghus gayaa hai ? Dukhad [Has this sickness intruded into the Indian Army also? Sad]”
This choice of words and the turn of phrase is deplorable and insulting, and it is a sign of the times that this anti-Muslim slur was liked by more than 10,000 users, and also retweeted. In an inexplicable response, the tweet by the Jammu Army PRO was deleted and this may have emboldened the anti-iftar brigade to claim victory over the socio-religious ethos of the fauj and testified to the pernicious trend that social media can trigger — more so when it is supported by trolls.
Many military veterans and concerned citizens were outraged at the turn of events and this was expressed in private groups and social media platforms. To its credit, the Army moved deftly and a few days later (April 25) there was a picture of Lieutenant General (Lt Gen) DP Pandey, Corps Commander 15 Corps in Srinagar, offering namaz that was shared on Twitter and the message was clear and confident. In a subtle manner, the Army demonstrated its commitment to the tradition of pluralism and respecting all faiths.
The Indian military does not differentiate on the basis of religion and the principle that is adhered to is that an Army officer adopts the faith of his troops. And, where there are mixed units with personnel drawn from the major faiths of the subcontinent, all of them are accorded the same sanctity.
Religious beliefs are important for the soldier and the Indian tradition of nurturing this faith in the divine is hoary. In the last millennium, with the arrival of new faiths — Islam, Sikhism and Christianity — despite the battles and wars that ravaged the subcontinent, rulers kept their armies mixed and the best known example in north India is that of the Sikh ruler, Maharaja Ranjit Singh (1780–1839), who had Hindu, Muslim and Christian commanders in his army.
During the colonial period, the British were also cognisant of respecting the faith of the Indian soldier and the essential pluralism of faiths was nurtured in an empathetic manner. Post 1947, the Indian Army acquired its religious equipoise and units or regimental centres had their mandir-masjid-gurudwara (MMG) and churches — often located in proximity — as dictated by the composition of the troops. Religious teachers of each faith are inducted into the Army and are part of the paltan and there are numerous inspiring tales of the Hindu pandit, Muslim maulvi and Sikh granthi leading the prayers of another faith if such an exigency arose, which was not uncommon. In short, the principle of sarv dharam samaan — or all faiths are the same — was internalised and became the DNA of the Indian military.
This ethos of nurturing pluralism has evolved over the decades in the Army and in the early 1980s, the concept of a sarv dharam sthal (SDS) — or one venue housing all the places of worship — gradually took root. This initiative was mooted by Lt Gen ML Chibber, a former Northern army commander, and the JAK LI (Jammu and Kashmir Light Infantry) centre near Srinagar has the distinction of creating the first such common religious venue.
Whether MMG or SDS, the abiding ethos of the Army is to respect all faiths while the soldier remains steadfast to naam-namak-nishan — or regimental honour and loyalty to country and flag. One of the foundational principles for any military is the use of force to defend nation and sovereignty — and killing the adversary, if need be — has to be mediated through the prism of duty, legitimacy and rectitude. Absent this underpinning, there is little to distinguish the soldier from a mercenary and this frame of reference has to be guarded zealously.
The professionalism, pluralistic ethos and apolitical nature of the Indian Army are widely recognised and self-correction is swift where there has been a transgression. It remains the last instrument of the State when there is a challenge to national sovereignty or internal stability, and it has always risen to the occasion — often at heavy cost.
Maintaining this institutional ozone layer that insulates the military from the domestic political churn is imperative to sustain the normative rhythms of a vibrant democracy and the United States experience of January 2021 is sobering. In this context it is deeply disturbing that no political leader, including retired Army officers who are part of the Bharatiya Janata Party, chose to push back against this shameful assault on the pluralistic ethos of the Army. This bodes ill for the country.
THIS ETHOS OF NURTURING PLURALISM HAS EVOLVED OVER THE DECADES IN THE ARMY AND IN THE EARLY 1980S, THE CONCEPT OF A SARV DHARAM STHAL — OR ONE VENUE HOUSING ALL THE PLACES OF WORSHIP — GRADUALLY TOOK ROOT