Gen Malik's letter informing all Veteraans of the outcome of his interaction with the PM

Dear Friends,
As you are aware, I wrote a letter to the Prime Minister (PM) on April 27, 2008 (copy attached) to apprise him of the low state of morale caused by the 6th Pay Commission Report amongst serving and retired soldiers and their families, particularly in the Army. The PM acknowledged the letter. His Principal Secretary, Mr Nair, rang me up to convey that the PM wished to convey his assurance that the Government will take note of my inputs in resolving the anomalies and the Armed Forces will be looked after. He said that my letter with PM's remarks is being sent to the Cabinet Secretary. A similar reply came from the Defense Minister.

On May 10, I met the PM in his house. I conveyed the gravity of the situation on two counts:

· Shortage of officers in combat units and inadequate intake; its present and future impact on the efficiency, discipline, morale and value system.

· Public agitations by ex- servicemen, intensification in future with the likelihood of leadership getting into the hands of some radical elements; possibility of public nuisance and flash points. I conveyed to him very clearly that such a display of frustration, despondency and anger by ex-servicemen in public will neither be good for the armed forces nor for the country.

The PM once again tried to assure me that the Government will take care of all legitimate interests of the armed forces. He has already conveyed it to the Review Committee. I said that this matter now needs to be handled at political level and should not be left to the bureaucrats. Armed forces personnel no longer have confidence in the Review Committee of bureaucrats, particularly when this Committee does not have representation from the armed forces despite repeated requests made within the Government and outside. The fact that the PM had passed this problem to such a Committee had not gone well with military personnel. It had strengthened the feeling that the status of the armed forces stands eroded more than ever before, military leadership has no say, and the Government continues to be insensitive to their problems and is unlikely to give them justice. The military should have had a seperate pay commission, as in other countries.

At this stage, the PM remarked that the Defense Secretary will represent the armed forces. I reiterated that when the armed forces did not have confidence in the bureaucracy, how can he represent them and get them justice. This conversation led to the PM stating that this is the institutionalized manner in which the Government exercises civilian control over the armed forces.

I told the PM that the civilian control over military means political control and not bureaucratic control. If all military inputs were to be filtered through the bureaucracy, we will never be able to fight a war well or defend the country. The political leaders must deal directly with the military on all important issues. I then informed him of two past practices (a) Mrs Gandhi and Mr Vajpayee used to meet the three Chiefs privately once in a month to discuss their views on various diplomatic and military strategic issues (b) The CCS discusses procurement issues with the Secretaries. Service Chiefs, who are directly affected, are not even called. I had gone through a war situation and have first hand experience of the harm that it does. The PM said that these were good suggestions. He will go over them for future.

The meeting ended with the PM trying to assure me once again that he will look after the interest of the armed forces. However, he gave no assurance that he will introduce political handling of the 6th Pay Commission anomalies at this stage.


Please note that:
· The above-mentioned letter and meeting minutes indicate where the serving and ex-servicemen appear to stand in our efforts to get the Sixth PCR anomalies corrected.
· I have deliberately refrained from conveying any personal comments/impression of the meeting.



With regards and best wishes,

Ved Malik


--
General V P Malik
Former Chief of Army Staff,
251, Sector 6,
Panchkula (Haryana) 134 109
India
Tele: +91 172 2586390

Salary & Govt. Concessions for a Member of Parliament (MP)

Salary & Govt. Concessions for a Member of Parliament (MP)

Monthly Salary : 12,000

Expense for Constitution per month : 10,000

Office expenditure per month : 14,000

Traveling concession (Rs. 8 per km) : 48,000 ( e.g..For a visit from kerala to Delhi & return: 6000 km)

Daily DA AT during parliament meets : 500/day

Charge for 1 class (A/C) in train: Free (For any number of times)
(All over India )

Charge for Business Class in flights : Free for 40 trips / year (With wife or P.A.)

Rent for MP hostel at Delhi : Free

Electricity costs at home : Free up to 50,000 units

Local phone call charge : Free up to 1 ,70,000 calls.

TOTAL expense for a MP [having no qualification] per year : 32,00,000 [I.e . 2.66 lakh/month]

TOTAL expense for 5 years : 1,60,00,000

For 534 MPs, the expense for 5 years :
8,54,40,00,000 (nearly 855 crores)

AND THE PRIME MINISTER IS ASKING THE HIGHLY QUALIFIED, OUT PERFORMING CEOs TO CUT DOWN THEIR SALARIES.....

This is how all our tax money is been swallowed and price hike on our regular commodities.......
And this is the present condition of our country:



855 crores could make their life livable !!
Think of the great democracy we have..............
PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO ALL REAL CITIZENS OF INDIA ...
I'M,
STILL Proud to be INDIAN


Salary & Govt. Concessions for a Member of Parliament (MP)

Monthly Salary : 12,000

Expense for Constitution per month : 10,000

Office expenditure per month : 14,000

Traveling concession (Rs. 8 per km) : 48,000 ( e.g..For a visit from kerala to Delhi & return: 6000 km)

Daily DA AT during parliament meets : 500/day

Charge for 1 class (A/C) in train: Free (For any number of times)
(All over India )

Charge for Business Class in flights : Free for 40 trips / year (With wife or P.A.)

Rent for MP hostel at Delhi : Free

Electricity costs at home : Free up to 50,000 units

Local phone call charge : Free up to 1 ,70,000 calls.

TOTAL expense for a MP [having no qualification] per year : 32,00,000 [I.e . 2.66 lakh/month]

TOTAL expense for 5 years : 1,60,00,000

For 534 MPs, the expense for 5 years :
8,54,40,00,000 (nearly 855 crores)

AND THE PRIME MINISTER IS ASKING THE HIGHLY QUALIFIED, OUT PERFORMING CEOs TO CUT DOWN THEIR SALARIES..... AND OFFER PEANUTS TO THE DEFENSE WHO GET NONE OF THE ABOVE, BUT ARE EXPECTED TO DIE ?!

This is how all our tax money is been swallowed and price hike on our regular commodities.......
And this is the present condition of our country:



855 crores could make their life livable !!
Think of the great democracy we have..............
PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO ALL REAL CITIZENS OF INDIA ...
But,
STILL Proud to be INDIAN

Insult to Soldier, Injury to Nation!

In India, unlike armies in our neighbourhood, our armed forces have
been traditionally apolitical and exceedingly disciplined. The Indian
soldier has acquitted himself with honour in the wars that, thanks to
his valour, ignited great patriotic fervour among all men and women of
the country. Unfortunately for the Indian soldier, however, the worst
of these wars – the ongoing 'proxy war' – is not as spectacular as
all-out Indo-Pak wars and yet it has taken heavier toll than the
combined toll of all those wars in terms of lives of our soldiers and
national wealth. And it goes on unabated.



It is in such trying times that the recommendations of the Sixth Pay
Commission have delivered a shattering blow to the soldiery
demoralising the rank and file very badly. Officers and men across the
three Services are stunned even though solemn and silent. Never before
has the Indian soldier needed and deserved more honour, respect, love
and remuneration for his sacrifices and dedication. Constitutionally,
the Defence Forces have their constraints and cannot express their
problems in the manner in which most of our civil services and
brethren do through public demonstration. This handicap often sends
wrong signals to the political leaders who are used to noise,
pandemonium and violence in streets or in the House rather than quiet
presentations marked with etiquette and restraint. Over the years,
they have taken the silence of the armed forces for granted.



But times have changed now. Easy access to advanced means of
communication has laid the whole world bare for the soldier to form
his own perceptions. The speed and magnitude of socio-economic changes
have obliterated the class demarcations in our society to a large
extent giving rise to higher ambitions even among the village youth.
The profile of Indian soldier is no longer that of the proverbial
Sepoy Bhup Singh who would 'do or die without questioning why'. The
level of awareness among rank and file in the armed forces is
stunningly high today. Whereas life is becoming more and more
comfortable for everyone in the modern world, his operational burden
is becoming heavier by the day degrading his basic comforts and
heightening danger to his life. And his role is not limited only to
fight terrorism and the enemy. Almost every failure of the civil
administration comes to him to be redeemed. Be it emergencies like
natural calamities, disaster management, or man-made catastrophic
situations like communal violence, blasts, strikes, service breakdown
or even heaving hapless children from death traps like bore wells left
open in villages, everyone turns to the soldier – administration's
last resort and people's most reliable saviour! A soldier is a jack of
all trades!



He has had enough of it. He knows his power but is restrained by his
discipline and value system drilled into him through training and
tradition of chivalry by his leaders. But increasing pressures and
declining honour of the profession have pushed him to the corner. He
has no more space to manoeuvre and is left with only one option to
choose from: kill or get killed. The writing on the wall is clear and
people must be blind not to read it from the increasing number of
incidents like suicide, fratricide, desertion with a large number of
their frustrated leaders already queuing up to leave the service
prematurely. Are our political leaders able to fathom the seriousness
and real dimension of the problem? Is it merely a Services' problem?
No, it is a big national problem because our Defence Forces are the
guarantors of nation's safety and security against all kinds of
threats; and their higher motivation level will always be the most
significant factor in safeguarding our national interests. Therefore,
those in charge of affairs of the nation have a duty to ensure
maintenance of a high level of morale and motivation by requiting the
soldier honourably.



Does the following verse composed in anguish by Francis Quarles long
ago describe today's Indian psyche in painfully apt terms?

"Our God and soldiers we alike adore

Only at the brink of danger; not before;

After deliverance, both are alike requited –

Our God's forgotten and our soldiers slighted."



Now I understand why there was mass hysteria in Indian masses
eulogizing and adoring the soldier during Kargil War and why they
appear oblivious of all that is happening to their hero now.. Who
dared touch our soldier then? And now, who cares for a soldier whose
ongoing battle and sacrifices continue but are not melodramatic enough
to entertain or scare us!



High morale and fighting potential of the armed forces are a national
asset and worth as much as the cost of freedom and security of the
country. What you give to the soldier is not his remuneration; it is
your investment in national defence. Economic growth alone cannot make
India a super power in the world. Richness actually carries an element
of vulnerability along. It is the strong and able armed forces that
would provide credibility to the concept of 'super power'. Belittling
the soldier is, therefore, belittling the nation and weakening its
defence potential at a time when India, though poised to emerge as a
super power, is threatened by hordes of evil forces seeking to weaken
and disintegrate India from within and without. Even as we progress
economically, let us also make our future generations safe.



Whatever the notion of some of the politicians, Indian generals have
an accountability and owe clarifications to the Indian public who pay
for the hefty defence budget and for whose security the armed forces
are maintained. And we know for certain that our generals are
professionally as competent and morally as upright as the best in the
world, odd aberrations here and there notwithstanding. It was a
different army and their generals on whom Arthur Wellesley, Duke of
Wellington had lamented in one of his military dispatches in these
words:




"When I reflect upon the characters and attainments of our General
officers of this army – on whom I am to rely – I tremble; and, as Lord
Chesterfield said of the Generals of this day, 'I only hope that when
the enemy reads the list of their names, he trembles as I do!"



Indian generals must not be snubbed and their opinion – be it on
matters of national security or border disputes must be respected
because most of those who shamelessly comment on a General's propriety
to speak to media on such matters have not treaded where the general
has. In fact others must not speak out on such matters without the
general's informed counsel.



There was a time when bureaucracy in the US was influencing the
political leadership in somewhat similar manner while deciding on
army's budgetary needs. In 1933 Gen MacArthur, then Chief of the US
Army, did not hesitate to protest against the deep cuts in the Army's
budget. And when President Franklin Roosevelt did not relent, he
roared with his characteristic disregard to personal interests, "Mr.
President, when we lose the next war and an American boy lying in the
mud with an enemy bayonet through his belly and an enemy foot on his
throat, spits out his last curse, I want the name on his lips to be
Roosevelt, not MacArthur." He concluded by saying that he was
resigning although he was later persuaded to withdraw it after
Roosevelt finally yielded and reversed most of the proposed cuts.



All top generals, admirals and air marshals of India are today
squirming with similar belly aches and may stand up putting country's
interests ahead of their own. Let us hope the government will not
compel them to speak out loudly because military 'loudness' is never
good for ear drums!

stand up for the indian soldier

It is with a sense of disbelief that one hears the Indian minister of state for defence, sitting in his cozy air-conditioned seminar room, pontificating that 'it is unbecoming' of former soldiers to protest against the treatment meted out to them by the government.. So here's a non-soldier making a public protest. One hopes that it is not below the dignity of the minister to read this.
The minister would not have dared to make such a comment had the protestors been a part of his or his party's vote bank. The fact that the Indian armed services do not go public with their grievances does not mean that they do not have any concerns and the fact that they have been forced to come to the streets should make the minister and his government acknowledge how desperate the situation might be.
The Indian government is fooling itself if it thinks that by dragging its feet on the issue of the armed forces dissatisfaction with the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission, it can make the issue go away.
A country that refuses to respect its armed forces will eventually end up getting forces that will not respect the nations' aspirations. A country makes a sacred contract with its soldiers that while he/she will lay down his/her life when called upon to do so, the nation will take good care of his/her and his/her family's needs to the extent its resources would permit.
This contract underpins the very survival of a nation as when its territorial integrity and political independence are under threat, the nation looks upon the only instrument that can protect it -- its armed forces.
While all governments have to look for a considered bargain between their commitments and power and between power and resources, a responsible government will always be aware of the serious implications of not spending adequate resources on defence.
The debate as it has been made out to be in some quarters between defence and development is a spurious one. Unless adequate provisions are made for defence, no state will be able to pursue its developmental agenda. This is much more important for a country like India that faces a unique security environment with two of its 'adversaries' straddling it on two sides of its borders and problems on all sides of its periphery.
A government can keep spouting pious rhetoric about global peace and non-violence but it realises fully that force is the ultima ratio in international relations.. Politics among nations is conducted in the brooding shadow of violence. Either a state remains able and willing to use force to preserve and enhance its interests or it is forced to live at the mercy of its militarily powerful counterpart.
Even Nehru, after neglecting defence for all the years after independence had to eventually concede in 1962 that India's military weakness 'has been a temptation, and a little military strength may be a deterrent.'
The Indian public and press remain apathetic on defence issues. We make Kargil into a television spectacle, an opportunity for our journalists to try to show their temporary bravery by going to the frontlines for a few hours and getting the excitement of covering a war from the inside. And then when it is all over, our soldiers have been interred into their graves, we move on to new and more exciting spectacles -- to our song and dance reality shows and saas-bahu sagas, forgetting that soldiers are still on guard.
This is a nation that will cry with Lata Mangeshkar when she sings Aye Mere Watan Ke Logon but will not make any effort to understand the real problems and concerns of its soldiers. It is a sign of the highly skewed priorities of the Indian media that the rising turmoil and dissatisfaction within the ranks of nations' armed forces is being given only perfunctory coverage.
It is an issue of nation's very survival yet the media seems busy with its devotion of superficialities. Every rave and rant of Bollywood actors is religiously covered, detailed dissection of seemingly never-ending cricket matches are conducted, exorbitant pay rises in the corporate sector make it to the headlines but the one issue that can make or break the future of this country is consigned to the margins.
We continue to pray at the altar of our false heroes while our real heroes continue to face neglect and scorn.
The armed forces feel they have never got their due from various pay commissions over the years but the government in its wisdom decided to keep the armed forces away from any representation in the latest Pay Commission. The dominance of bureaucrats meant that while the interests of the bureaucrats were well-recognised, the armed services once again ended up getting a raw deal.
The discontent is so serious that some of the best and brightest in our services have refused to go for the Higher Command Courses and more and more are seeking an early retirement. Indian armed forces are desperately trying to fill vacancies as other professions are luring the young of the country.
Against the sanctioned strength of 300 per batch, the National Defence Academy finds that it can only attract 192 cadres (cadets?) this year. The same story repeats itself in the Indian Military Academy . A country that purports to be a rising power is facing a shortage of more than 11,000 officers.
The reason is pretty obvious: One can't think of any major power in the world that treats its soldiers the way India does. It is indeed a sorry sight when India 's bravest have to literally cry out for help from a callous politico-bureaucratic elite.
Our politicians remain more than willing to waste tax payers money by routinely boycotting Parliament and have never shied away from increasing their own pay and allowances, claiming that they remain underpaid. Yet those who defend the sanctity of Parliament are given a short shrift.
The abysmal knowledge of defence issues that pervades the Indian political class probably gives them an illusion that the country is being protected by divine blessings.
Political apathy and bureaucratic design are rapidly eroding the self-esteem of our forces. A functioning liberal democracy needs a loyal soldier that can take care of the state's security, allowing the state to look after its citizenry.. In India , the State is gradually withering away, all that's left is the loyal soldier. How long will this soldier, under siege from all sides, remain steadfast to its commitments, is a question all Indians should seriously ponder on.

Dr Harsh V Pant teaches at King's College London .

Kautilya's wisdom ...... why don't our politicians and babus get some

Pretty interesting read. Its a letter written to Chandragupt Maurya by his Prime Advisor Chanakya and reproduced in "Kautilya" , his monumental State treatise.
He Wrote:

"The Mauryan soldier does not the Royal treasuries enrich nor the Royal granaries fill. He does not carry out trade and commerce nor produce scholars, littérateurs, artistes, artisans, sculptors, architects, craftsmen, doctors and administrators. He does not build roads and ramparts nor dig wells and reservoirs. He does not do any of this directly. The soldier only and merely ensures that the tax, tribute and revenue collectors travel forth and return safely; that the farmer tills, harvests, stores and markets his produce unafraid of pillage; that the trader, merchant and financier function and travel across the length and breadth of the realm unmolested; that the savant, sculptor, maestro and mentor create works of art, literature, philosophy and astrology in quietitude; that the architect designs and builds his Vaastus without tension; that the tutor and the priest teach and preach in peace; that the rishis meditate in wordless silence; that the doctor invents cures and medicines undisturbed; that the mason and bricklayer work unhindered; that the mother and the wife go about their chores and bring up children in harmony and tranquility; that the cattle graze freely without being lifted or stolen. Pataliputra reposes each night in peaceful comfort, O King, secure in the belief that the distant borders of Magadha are inviolate and the interiors are safe and secure, thanks only to the Mauryan Army standing vigil with naked swords and eyes peeled for action, day and night, in weather fair and foul, all eight praharas (round the clock), quite unmindful of personal discomfort and hardship, all through the year, year after year. While the citizenry of the State contributes to see that the State prospers and flourishes, the soldier guarantees it continues to EXIST as a State! To this man, O Rajadhiraja, you owe a debt: please, therefore, see to it, suo motu, that the soldier continuously gets his dues in every
form and respect, be they his needs or his wants, for he is not likely to ask for them himself. The day the soldier has to demand his dues will be a sad day for Magadha for then, on that day, you will have lost all moral sanction to be King!

No honour please, you are Indian Navy Chief

TEN YEARS ago, the Indian Navy suffered a disgraceful defeat. The humiliation was inflicted not by any inimical foreign power, but by powers-that-be in New Delhi's South Block. In December 1998, the then Chief of the Naval Staff (CNS), Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat, was unceremoniously booted out at the instance of 'honourable' defence minister George Fernandes, who could not make him bootlick.

Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, a staunch nationalist, expected to be the last person to hurt the country's honour, had his compulsions to back the Defence Minister. Fernandes was playing a key role in letting the government survive, acting as go-between with Tamilnadu chief minister Jayalalithaa. The Defence Minister's main job, in fact, was to rush to Chennai to satiate her routinely. Bhagwat's refusal to have vice admiral Harinder Singh, enjoying Fernandes' confidence, as his deputy was the ostensible reason for the sack. Actually, the purpose was to teach a lesson to the service chiefs; they were harming entrenched interests doing deals in South Block.

In July that year, defence secretary Ajit Kumar had conveyed Fernandes' instructions to the service commanders that they should seek prior approval of the ministry before intercepting any vessel suspected to be carrying narcotics and arms. The three service chiefs jointly wrote back that interdiction operations in the Andamans were 'mandated operations', which did not require the 'prior approval' of the ministry.

It was open secret, later caught in camera by Tehelka that the drug and arms mafia had links with socialites and 'friends' of George. The Admiral was bold enough to publicly ask, "Why are Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Burmese and the northeastern rebels operating from the house of the Defence Minister?" According to the Navy Chief, as per the policy framework, 'civilian control' does not allow criminals in Parliament and government to boss over the Armed Services. He asserted, "Never in the 50 years of our history since 1947 has the subversion of the chain of military command been carried out in such a blatant manner – destroying the entire civil-military relationship, undermining the disciplinary framework of an armed force of the union." Sadly, it was the South Block mandarins who triumphed over the Navy Chief.

Ever since November last year, South Block had been uncomfortable again at the service chiefs asserting their dignity. They wanted to get honoured as much as Robert Vadra – son-in-law of Sonia Gandhi – without realising that even their 'supreme commander' has to pay obeisance to her! The civil aviation minister grudgingly admitted, "The men who guard our borders should not have to be frisked. There are already 11 people who are exempt. The chiefs of defence services come in at number 12." Even that number 12 required a salvo from former Army chief Gen S Roychoudhary: "It's a small symbolic gesture and the government should have gone ahead with exempting the three service chiefs. In public eye, men in uniform are iconic figures." Indian netas, babus and their cronies, however, do not agree that they should be iconic figures!

It is now the turn of Navy Chief, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, to be shown his place by South Block babus and defence minister. Significantly, Admiral Mehta happens to be the senior-most among the heads of the three services. As the chairman of Chiefs of Staff (CoS) committee, he is the vital contact point between civilians and the military. Humiliating him must teach a lesson to others!

Officials of Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and armchair strategic affairs pundits have not been too happy in recent years with initiatives taken by Manmohan Singh's government. Recently, inaugurating the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS) at New Delhi, the PM pointed out that it was not a military pact where a set of nations joined forces against another; it aimed to bring regional states together to fight terrorism, piracy and natural disasters. Singh urged the gathering of naval chiefs to develop a "comprehensive cooperative framework of maritime security." Admiral Mehta contrasted IONS – a collective grouping of states that are arrayed against common security challenges and threats – with cold-war constructs of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the Warsaw Pact.

Indian Foreign Service (IFS) babus, with a mindset belonging to cold war time warp, do not find the doctrine palatable. Also, high-science babus in outfits like Defence Research and Development (DRDO), adept at siphoning off monstrous sums to unveil fictitious breakthroughs to drum up hollow national pride, are alarmed at the prospect of exposure of their real prowess. Left Front politicians – chief beneficiaries of 'deals' with their old Russian masters – too resist the change in attitude.

MEA has been taking exceptions to the Navy taking decisions, which have 'foreign policy implications' without consultation. Antony, at their instance, had earlier reprimanded the Admiral for not defending the retrofitting of the junked Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov at huge expense and renaming it as Vikramaditya. His 'friends' from Kerala and Bengal had also bitterly opposed the Indo-US Malabar exercises, in which ships from Japan, Australia, Singapore participated. The comrades organised 'dharnas' (protest road shows) along the coast.

At the instance of the comrades, Antony recently criticised the naval headquarters for embedding a US warship – USS Cole – in the Indo-British Konkan 2008 exercise – part of UK's Orion 08 Deployment. It was the Royal Navy that considered USS Cole eminently suited to be an observer. It symbolises the cooperation of navies across the world to jointly foil terrorism at sea. Suspected Al Qaida suicide bombers had attacked it in October 2000 at the Yemeni port of Aden. But it is back. The pro-Iran lobby in MEA found its presence offending during Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's India visit.

The Royal navy's decision to embed USS Cole in replacement for a Spanish ship had, in fact, been conveyed to the defence ministry two days in advance. But, Antony was probably busy in powwows with the Left and could not see it. He instructed that from now on, contours of naval exercises with any country must be spelled out to the last detail and 'well in advance'! That ominously smacks of his predecessor George Fernandes, who insisted on obtaining 'prior approval' by the babus before catching arms traffickers!

Like Vajpayee's government in 1998, the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government of Singh too survives with 'outside support' from the Left Front. Singh is reckoned as the proxy of Sonia Gandhi and the weakest and meekest PM India has ever had. The Congress is aware of the compulsion to maintain cordial relations with the Left to stay in power. No wonder, Manmohan Singh, like Vajpayee, chooses to look the other way when his defence minister, who is the go-between with 'outside supporters' to prop his government, causes to the Armed services worse humiliation than any enemy country!

This month, Antony shot down the Navy's recommendation to give a two-year extension to Commodore M Gidwani, the present Judge Advocate General. The babus of his ministry judged that the Judge Advocate General was not fully qualified to head its legal branch. Captain Harinder Gupta, the senior most officer from the Navy's legal cadre, has instead been appointed to take charge from July 1. This reminds one of what Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat said 10 years ago about 'civilian control' of the country: "It relates to issues of war and peace; it relates to matters of strategic consequence. It prohibits day-to-day interference in matters of appointment, posting and promotion."

Defence and MEA babus, who were taken aback at the frigid reception to Pranab Mukherjee and Antony given at Moscow last year, were also furious at Admiral Mehta's 12-day long trip to the US recently. They feel that the absence of a service chief during Parliament session is against 'democratic norms'! Next, they may want the Armed Forces bosses to be compulsorily present in the House to watch how convicted criminals, supari-takers (hired murderers), movie stars, and just plain goons make war while transacting business of enacting law!

It is now learnt that the Navy Chief has been asked to take a commercial flight, like any ordinary chap, for his upcoming visit to Thailand, which is part of Manmohan Singh's strategy spelled out at IONS. The defence minister does not want Admiral Mehta to use one of the four Embraer VVIP planes available.

Speaking on a report this week in Janes's Defence Weekly about the ongoing construction of a formidable, state-of-the-art marine and submarine base by China, Antony bragged, "Whether in sea lanes or in the land bodies, our armed forces are always taking all precautions to protect our security interests!" What better way to protect the country's interests than to deny basic honour and esteem, deserved by the officers directing the armed forces! And how long is the farce going to continue?
 

It pays to be a "Babu"

It was meant to hand out sops to government servants ahead of an election year, but the Sixth Central Pay Commission is fast turning into an acrimonious and divisive affair.

Disagreements have been a hallmark of the last two pay commissions, which covered the two decades since 1986, but this time the tone of the protests is more serious.

The armed forces, constituting 42 per cent of the government staff, and the police force, accounting for nearly 37 per cent, which are responsible for the external and internal security of the country, have said that they feel let down by the latest pay commission’s recommendations.

The armed forces have rejected it outright. “There is no question of us accepting the pay commission’s recommendations in their present form,” says a senior army official.

The target of all this ire is the bureaucracy, which comprises 22 per cent of the government. The armed forces feel that the bureaucratic arm is wielding its clout over others and have voiced their disappointment with Minister for Defence A.K. Antony, while ex-servicemen met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi.

Now Indian Police Service (IPS) officers have joined the chorus, warning that the pay commission has widened the gap between the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and the IPS.

Members of the IPS Central Association met Sonia and Minister for Home Affairs Shivraj Patil, seeking their intervention and pointing out what they claimed were discriminatory proposals.

This dissatisfaction stems from the fundamental change brought about by the Sixth Pay Commission in the way relative statuses will be defined in the bureaucracy. Currently, the basic pay of an officer is used as the parameter for defining the status of the position he holds.

Higher the basic pay, higher is the position. According to the new recommendations, however, the basic pay will not define status. In the scheme that has now been formulated, a grade pay has been defined for the purpose.

A higher grade pay will indicate a higher status. When grade pays are equivalent, higher total emoluments including all special pays will define a higher status.

The pay commission has thus created a select club of 8,000 officers in the highest pay bracket of PB-4, with salaries upward of Rs 52,000 per month. The IAS, which generally witnesses faster promotions, will no doubt form the majority in this club.

Armed forces personnel retire early, while civil servants serve till the age of 60. Besides, career progression in the armed forces is slow and limited.

All IAS officers can become joint secretaries in just 14 years, while only 3.5 per cent of army officers can reach the equivalent rank of major general, and that too, after 33 years of service. Even after attaining the position, an army officer will only serve for another five years before he retires.

The bureaucrat, on the other hand, will enjoy the benefits of the equivalent position for 19 years before retiring. “It is the third battle of the pecking order (after the two previous pay commissions),” says Major General Surjit Singh (retired), adding, “It is difficult to say who will win or lose this struggle, but the nation will definitely lose.”

The IPS Central Association has also expressed concern over the downgrading of the position of state directorgeneral of police (DGP) vis-à-vis that of the state chief secretary.
Bureaucracy
All civil servants can reach the New Pay Bracket 4, which starts at Rs 52,000 per month.
Grade pays for all IAS officers. Since grade pays will now define the status of a position, IAS will benefit.
According to the recommendation, all IAS officers can reach the rank of joint secretary in just 14 years. The IAS witnesses faster promotions.

Armed forces
Only 3.5 per cent of armed forces officers of the rank of major general and above draw Rs 52,000 a month.
Grade pay is available to just 15 per cent of the officers, i.e., brigadiers and above.
It will take an army officer 33 years to reach an equivalent rank of major general. He can serve in the position for just five years before retirement.

Police
Less than a dozen police officials will enjoy parity with close to 200 secretary-rank IAS officials.
Grade pays for all IPS officials is three-four years slower than in the administrative service.
Promotion to the post of inspector general will take 20 years. The deputy inspector general’s post is now functional, not supervisory.


“The pay commission has only formalised the discrimination against the police force and perpetuates a colonial practice that favours the IAS. If the suggestion is to have different pay scales for IPS officers in the states and the Centre, then it should be done for IAS officers as well,” a state DGP told India Today.

Another big anomaly concerns the position of deputy inspector general (DIG) of police, which was earlier equivalent to that of a state commissioner from the IAS, but has now been made equivalent to an inspector general’s.

Even as the police service has demanded that the DIG’s post be put under a higher pay scale, it has been made a functional post instead of a supervisory one.

The army is unhappy with the imbalances in the military service pay, a monthly allowance that has been introduced by the pay commission. The IPS wants a similar police service pay, arguing that its personnel face greater risks—such as threats from anti-social elements—as compared to the other civil services.

Police officials have also been demanding risk-based pay, citing threat to life and injury. Indeed, the police force lost 4,972 officers in the last five years, with 994 casualties and over 8,000 personnel maimed/injured per year. Yet, some of the key proposals by the IPS, including a grant of hardship pay, have been turned down.

There are divisions among the Central police organisations (CPOs) too, with officials alleging that IPS officers are more concerned with their own cadre than the CPOs they head. The IPS Central Association, in a wish-list presented to Patil, has sought parity with the director-generals (DGs) of CPOs, who have been placed in a higher grade.

But as per the commission’s present recommendations, only DGs of the Border Security Force, the Central Reserve Police Force, the Central Industrial Security Force, the Indo-Tibetan Border Police and the Sashastra Seema Bal are in the higher pay band of Rs 80,000.

Another issue is that of grade pay for field postings at the district level. The police association has sought a higher grade pay for IPS officers in the districts so that they are not at a disadvantage as compared to IAS officers like the district magistrate or the additional district magistrate, who now come under a higher grade.

While the battle lines are drawn, it seems that the Government, which does not want any unpopularity creeping into the administrative and police machinery in a pre-election year, will extend an olive branch to calm the men in khaki.

It has already set up a high-level official committee headed by Cabinet Secretary K.M. Chandrasekhar to look into the pay commission report. The prime minister, too, admitted that the Commission may have fallen short of expectations.

“I would like our civil and defence services to be properly rewarded,” he told a gathering of civil servants. A vast majority of his government machinery will be waiting to see if he puts his money where his mouth is.