Indian Army: News and Discussion
- Thread starter Sridhar
- Start date
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
http://www.timesnownews.com/india/v...ion-india-muslims-pakistani-terrorists/198476
'We don't communalise martyrs': Army responds after Owaisi says soldiers killed in J&K attack included Muslims
Srinagar: A day after AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi tried to communalise the martyrdom of soldiers killed in last week's Jammu terror attack at Sunjuwan Army camp, the Indian Army gave it back to the Hyderabad MP.
Addressing a press conference, Lt General Devraj Anbu, GOC Northern Command, said the Army doesn't communalise martyrs, unlike some politicians. Without naming Owaisi, Lt General Anbu said, “We don't communalise martyrs, those making statements don't know the Army well.”
On Tuesday, Owaisi has slammed those who question the patriotism of Muslims, while referring to five Armymen from Kashmir who laid down their lives fighting Pakistani terrorists at Sunjuwan.
The so-called "9 pm" nationalists (those who appear in prime time TV debates) question the nationalism of Muslims and Kashmiri Muslims, Owaisi had said on Tuesday. “In this (Sunjuwan attack) incident, five Kashmiri Muslims have laid down their lives. Why aren't you talking about it? This is a reminder to all those nationalists who question my integrity and the love for this country," the AIMIM chief had added.
Owaisi's comments were seen as an attempt to communalise and label the armed forces personnel as Hindus, Muslims etc. The comments yesterday received widespread condemnation and evoked an official response from the Army today.
Meanwhile, Lt General Anbu said anyone who picks up arms against the state will be dealt with sternly.
“All three groups – Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, Jaish-e-Mohammed or Lashkar-e-Toiba - are hands in glove, whether it's in Valley or here (Jammu). There's no differentiation, they keep jumping from one Tanzim to other. Anyone who picks up an arm and is against the state, is a terrorist and we'll deal with him,” the Army official said.
“Social media is also responsible for the increase in terror activities. It is engaging the youth on a large scale, and I think we need to focus on this issue,” he added.
“Enemy is frustrated and is trying softer targets. When they fail at borders they attack camps. Yes, the youth joining terrorism is a concern, we need to address this trend. In 2017, we focused on leadership and eliminated it,” he went on to add while flagging the concern about youth joining terrorist outfits.
Defending Owaisi, Congress leader Sandeep Dikshit said, “Muslims contribute towards nation just like anyone else. Outfits say Muslims are anti-nationals and don't love the nation. It's almost symbolic that if you are in the Army, you are a nationalist. I think that is why Owaisi ji had to say that.”
A group of Pakistan-based JeM terrorists had struck the Sunjuwan military camp in Jammu early on Saturday, killing seven people, including six Army soldiers.
'We don't communalise martyrs': Army responds after Owaisi says soldiers killed in J&K attack included Muslims
Srinagar: A day after AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi tried to communalise the martyrdom of soldiers killed in last week's Jammu terror attack at Sunjuwan Army camp, the Indian Army gave it back to the Hyderabad MP.
Addressing a press conference, Lt General Devraj Anbu, GOC Northern Command, said the Army doesn't communalise martyrs, unlike some politicians. Without naming Owaisi, Lt General Anbu said, “We don't communalise martyrs, those making statements don't know the Army well.”
On Tuesday, Owaisi has slammed those who question the patriotism of Muslims, while referring to five Armymen from Kashmir who laid down their lives fighting Pakistani terrorists at Sunjuwan.
The so-called "9 pm" nationalists (those who appear in prime time TV debates) question the nationalism of Muslims and Kashmiri Muslims, Owaisi had said on Tuesday. “In this (Sunjuwan attack) incident, five Kashmiri Muslims have laid down their lives. Why aren't you talking about it? This is a reminder to all those nationalists who question my integrity and the love for this country," the AIMIM chief had added.
Owaisi's comments were seen as an attempt to communalise and label the armed forces personnel as Hindus, Muslims etc. The comments yesterday received widespread condemnation and evoked an official response from the Army today.
Meanwhile, Lt General Anbu said anyone who picks up arms against the state will be dealt with sternly.
“All three groups – Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, Jaish-e-Mohammed or Lashkar-e-Toiba - are hands in glove, whether it's in Valley or here (Jammu). There's no differentiation, they keep jumping from one Tanzim to other. Anyone who picks up an arm and is against the state, is a terrorist and we'll deal with him,” the Army official said.
“Social media is also responsible for the increase in terror activities. It is engaging the youth on a large scale, and I think we need to focus on this issue,” he added.
“Enemy is frustrated and is trying softer targets. When they fail at borders they attack camps. Yes, the youth joining terrorism is a concern, we need to address this trend. In 2017, we focused on leadership and eliminated it,” he went on to add while flagging the concern about youth joining terrorist outfits.
Defending Owaisi, Congress leader Sandeep Dikshit said, “Muslims contribute towards nation just like anyone else. Outfits say Muslims are anti-nationals and don't love the nation. It's almost symbolic that if you are in the Army, you are a nationalist. I think that is why Owaisi ji had to say that.”
A group of Pakistan-based JeM terrorists had struck the Sunjuwan military camp in Jammu early on Saturday, killing seven people, including six Army soldiers.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
http://www.business-standard.com/ar...2018-what-must-it-do-next-118021600207_1.html
Indian Army killed 20 Pak soldiers along LoC in 2018: What must it do next?
Why is Islamabad not deterred when the Indian Army has killed close to five Pakistani soldiers for every single personnel it has lost? Why does Pakistan continue to violate the ceasefire agreement?
The Indian Army is "inflicting heavy pain on the Pakistani side" and using coordinated fire assaults as it tightens the screws on Pakistan along the Line of Control (LoC). In fact, the Indian Army's pressure on the Pakistani army along the LoC has reportedly forced the latter to sound 35 "red-alerts" for its border troops. For its part, Islamabad has been made to pay a heavy price, with the Indian Army revealing that it has killed at least 20 Pakistani Rangers and injured seven more in 2018 itself in cross-border firing along the LoC. However, given that the security forces estimate that close to 200 terrorists are waiting to cross into India and Pakistan's continued violations, are these military actions yielding the results we need.
The data available on Pakistani casualties in 2017 and official statements from both sides indicate that at least since September 2016 (when the Modi government greenlit cross-border surgical strikes after the Uri terrorist attack), the Indian Army has been employing a more muscular policy while responding to infiltrations and ceasefire violations. At present, according to news agencies, the Indian Army has been conducting pro-active operations along the LoC. Indian forces have killed 138 Pakistan Army personnel in 2017 in tactical operations and retaliatory firings along the LoC, intelligence sources told news agencies last month. The same sources revealed that the Indian Army lost 28 soldiers during the same period along the LoC. ALSO READ: 300 militants in Pakistan ready to enter India: Northern Command Army Chief Pakistani violations continue While the Pakistan Army has adopted a practice of not acknowledging the deaths of its soldiers, if the data is reliable, it begs the question: Why is Islamabad not deterred when the Indian Army has killed close to five Pakistani soldiers for every single personnel it has lost? Why is it that Pakistan continues to violate the 2003 ceasefire agreement?
On February 15, the Pakistani Army claimed it has destroyed an Indian Army post along the LoC, adding that the attack had led to the deaths of five Indian soldiers, the Pakistani daily Dawn reported. A video purportedly showing the attack from the Pakistani side was also released on Twitter.
This attack comes despite India's tough stance against such violations. According to reports, the Indian Army's local commanders along the LoC in Jammu and Kashmir have been given full freedom to respond effectively to any Pakistani misadventure. Army sources told news agencies that the Indian side has been inflicting heavy casualties on Pakistani troops while retaliating to the latter's shelling along the LoC in the past few weeks.
One surgical strike not enough, sustained strategy for inflicting losses on Pak needed Writing for the Business Standard in September last year, on the anniversary of the Indian Army's surgical strikes, Ajai Sahni, the executive director of the Institute for Conflict Management and South Asia Terrorism Portal, said that despite the 2016 cross-border surgical strikes, both sides were "locked into a cycle of escalating and bloody exchanges, with no evidence of any visible strategic gain to either, and no way to back off without losing face". Referring to tactical operations and cross-border strikes, Sahni argued that the surgical strikes "fell into a well-established tradition of retaliation" and that "they were no different in their strategic impact from earlier cross-border strikes". According to him, the impact of such strikes "can be no more than transient"
Instead, for such operations to have a lasting impact, Sahni advocated a "sustained strategy of attrition against Pakistan", which should be implemented over the years and decades. Perhaps, with the Indian Army refusing to allow any letup in the pressure along the LoC, as reported by various agencies and media organisations, the powers that be in India have decided to pursue a policy reminiscent to what Sahni advocated. Defence modernisation may be the key However, the ceasefire violations, and the infiltration attempts that often spark them, might require another solution: At the moment, we appear to be using the resources at hand to deal with Pakistan. A more fundamental overhaul of the defence infrastructure might be required. Speaking to Business Standard shortly after the Pathankot air base attack in January of 2016, C Christine Fair, an American defence expert and longtime Pakistan watcher, had said: "I do not see too many options that India has." She was responding to a question on how India could build an effective deterrence against Pakistan's sub-conventional warfare -- of which, the 2016 Pathankot attack, Uri attack, and the recent Sunjuwan camp attack are manifestations. Pointing out that India had not made the investments needed to ensure deterrence against such acts "by way of offensive superiority on its international border", Fair had said that India's conventional posture on the international border was that of "defensive competence instead of offensive superiority". Further, Fair assessed that defence modernisation for such deterrence would require India to reconfigure its military assets, "which were bulky and easily detectable, into smaller units that could be forward-deployed much more rapidly without the intelligence footprint that Pakistan can easily detect". Lastly, but most importantly, there needs to be the political will to use these assets as and when required, she had said.
Indian Army killed 20 Pak soldiers along LoC in 2018: What must it do next?
Why is Islamabad not deterred when the Indian Army has killed close to five Pakistani soldiers for every single personnel it has lost? Why does Pakistan continue to violate the ceasefire agreement?
The Indian Army is "inflicting heavy pain on the Pakistani side" and using coordinated fire assaults as it tightens the screws on Pakistan along the Line of Control (LoC). In fact, the Indian Army's pressure on the Pakistani army along the LoC has reportedly forced the latter to sound 35 "red-alerts" for its border troops. For its part, Islamabad has been made to pay a heavy price, with the Indian Army revealing that it has killed at least 20 Pakistani Rangers and injured seven more in 2018 itself in cross-border firing along the LoC. However, given that the security forces estimate that close to 200 terrorists are waiting to cross into India and Pakistan's continued violations, are these military actions yielding the results we need.
The data available on Pakistani casualties in 2017 and official statements from both sides indicate that at least since September 2016 (when the Modi government greenlit cross-border surgical strikes after the Uri terrorist attack), the Indian Army has been employing a more muscular policy while responding to infiltrations and ceasefire violations. At present, according to news agencies, the Indian Army has been conducting pro-active operations along the LoC. Indian forces have killed 138 Pakistan Army personnel in 2017 in tactical operations and retaliatory firings along the LoC, intelligence sources told news agencies last month. The same sources revealed that the Indian Army lost 28 soldiers during the same period along the LoC. ALSO READ: 300 militants in Pakistan ready to enter India: Northern Command Army Chief Pakistani violations continue While the Pakistan Army has adopted a practice of not acknowledging the deaths of its soldiers, if the data is reliable, it begs the question: Why is Islamabad not deterred when the Indian Army has killed close to five Pakistani soldiers for every single personnel it has lost? Why is it that Pakistan continues to violate the 2003 ceasefire agreement?
On February 15, the Pakistani Army claimed it has destroyed an Indian Army post along the LoC, adding that the attack had led to the deaths of five Indian soldiers, the Pakistani daily Dawn reported. A video purportedly showing the attack from the Pakistani side was also released on Twitter.
This attack comes despite India's tough stance against such violations. According to reports, the Indian Army's local commanders along the LoC in Jammu and Kashmir have been given full freedom to respond effectively to any Pakistani misadventure. Army sources told news agencies that the Indian side has been inflicting heavy casualties on Pakistani troops while retaliating to the latter's shelling along the LoC in the past few weeks.
One surgical strike not enough, sustained strategy for inflicting losses on Pak needed Writing for the Business Standard in September last year, on the anniversary of the Indian Army's surgical strikes, Ajai Sahni, the executive director of the Institute for Conflict Management and South Asia Terrorism Portal, said that despite the 2016 cross-border surgical strikes, both sides were "locked into a cycle of escalating and bloody exchanges, with no evidence of any visible strategic gain to either, and no way to back off without losing face". Referring to tactical operations and cross-border strikes, Sahni argued that the surgical strikes "fell into a well-established tradition of retaliation" and that "they were no different in their strategic impact from earlier cross-border strikes". According to him, the impact of such strikes "can be no more than transient"
Instead, for such operations to have a lasting impact, Sahni advocated a "sustained strategy of attrition against Pakistan", which should be implemented over the years and decades. Perhaps, with the Indian Army refusing to allow any letup in the pressure along the LoC, as reported by various agencies and media organisations, the powers that be in India have decided to pursue a policy reminiscent to what Sahni advocated. Defence modernisation may be the key However, the ceasefire violations, and the infiltration attempts that often spark them, might require another solution: At the moment, we appear to be using the resources at hand to deal with Pakistan. A more fundamental overhaul of the defence infrastructure might be required. Speaking to Business Standard shortly after the Pathankot air base attack in January of 2016, C Christine Fair, an American defence expert and longtime Pakistan watcher, had said: "I do not see too many options that India has." She was responding to a question on how India could build an effective deterrence against Pakistan's sub-conventional warfare -- of which, the 2016 Pathankot attack, Uri attack, and the recent Sunjuwan camp attack are manifestations. Pointing out that India had not made the investments needed to ensure deterrence against such acts "by way of offensive superiority on its international border", Fair had said that India's conventional posture on the international border was that of "defensive competence instead of offensive superiority". Further, Fair assessed that defence modernisation for such deterrence would require India to reconfigure its military assets, "which were bulky and easily detectable, into smaller units that could be forward-deployed much more rapidly without the intelligence footprint that Pakistan can easily detect". Lastly, but most importantly, there needs to be the political will to use these assets as and when required, she had said.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
http://indianexpress.com/article/in...ef-bipin-rawat-tells-jammu-and-kashmir-youth/
Stay away from elements indulging in terror activities, Army chief tells J&K youth
Jammu and Kashmir has been witnessing rise in terror activities, with the latest being an attack on an Army camp in Sunjuwan in Jammu in which six Army men were killed.
Army Chief Gen Bipin Rawat on Friday exhorted youths of Jammu and Kashmir to stay away from elements trying to indulge in terror activities in the militancy-infested state, and asked them to focus on building their lives through education.
His comments came during an interaction with a group of students from Rajouri district of the state, who are in the city as part of the national integration tour from February 11-21.
“You have to grow up to serve the country, the villages you come from. So, stay away from elements involved in any kind of terror activities in Jammu and Kashmir. Tell them that such activities will not yield any results,” Rawat said.
Jammu and Kashmir has been witnessing rise in terror activities, with the latest being an attack on an Army camp in Sunjuwan in Jammu in which six Army men were killed.
Thirteen students, aged 17-19 years, most of whom have come to Delhi for the first time, have already visited Chandigarh.
“What differences did you see between Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir? There is development here and cars ply freely in the streets. And, what else, there are no bunkers here, cause there is peace,” he said.
“Why we bring youth like you here, so that you can see atmosphere of peace… The common man is the biggest sufferer of terrorism,” the Army chief said.
Rawat also exhorted the students to learn from failures and remember that success is only “short-lived”.
“There was a student in my school days, who was a senior to me in Class 9. He failed his class, so he came to our class . In Class 10, he gave a moderate performance, and passed, but in Class 11, he topped. It took us all by surprise, but that was a great motivational story for us,” he said.
After Delhi, they will go to Dehradun, Haridwar and then to Jammu.
In Delhi, they saw the Red Fort, Nehru Museum and Planetarium, Akshardham Temple, and took a ride in Delhi Metro, an official accompanying them said.
“In Dehradun, plan is to visit the Indian Military Academy (IMA), Rashtriya Indian Military College (RIMC), Forest Research Institute (FRI) and Timber Museum. In Jammu, we will visit Sainik School, Nagrota and Balidan Sthal (war memorial),” he said.
Stay away from elements indulging in terror activities, Army chief tells J&K youth
Jammu and Kashmir has been witnessing rise in terror activities, with the latest being an attack on an Army camp in Sunjuwan in Jammu in which six Army men were killed.
Army Chief Gen Bipin Rawat on Friday exhorted youths of Jammu and Kashmir to stay away from elements trying to indulge in terror activities in the militancy-infested state, and asked them to focus on building their lives through education.
His comments came during an interaction with a group of students from Rajouri district of the state, who are in the city as part of the national integration tour from February 11-21.
“You have to grow up to serve the country, the villages you come from. So, stay away from elements involved in any kind of terror activities in Jammu and Kashmir. Tell them that such activities will not yield any results,” Rawat said.
Jammu and Kashmir has been witnessing rise in terror activities, with the latest being an attack on an Army camp in Sunjuwan in Jammu in which six Army men were killed.
Thirteen students, aged 17-19 years, most of whom have come to Delhi for the first time, have already visited Chandigarh.
“What differences did you see between Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir? There is development here and cars ply freely in the streets. And, what else, there are no bunkers here, cause there is peace,” he said.
“Why we bring youth like you here, so that you can see atmosphere of peace… The common man is the biggest sufferer of terrorism,” the Army chief said.
Rawat also exhorted the students to learn from failures and remember that success is only “short-lived”.
“There was a student in my school days, who was a senior to me in Class 9. He failed his class, so he came to our class . In Class 10, he gave a moderate performance, and passed, but in Class 11, he topped. It took us all by surprise, but that was a great motivational story for us,” he said.
After Delhi, they will go to Dehradun, Haridwar and then to Jammu.
In Delhi, they saw the Red Fort, Nehru Museum and Planetarium, Akshardham Temple, and took a ride in Delhi Metro, an official accompanying them said.
“In Dehradun, plan is to visit the Indian Military Academy (IMA), Rashtriya Indian Military College (RIMC), Forest Research Institute (FRI) and Timber Museum. In Jammu, we will visit Sainik School, Nagrota and Balidan Sthal (war memorial),” he said.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
http://www.merinews.com/article/ind...nstilled-in-pakistani-soldiers/15929107.shtml
Indian Army's fear should be instilled in Pakistani soldiers
On Saturday, 10 February, Pakistan sponsored jehadi organisation Jaish-e-Mohammad attacked Sunjwan Army camp on the outskirts of Jammu, martyring seven people including six soldiers and one civilian.
Even before this attack was over by Monday, with all three jehadis being killed, jehadis of Lashkar-e-Taiba tried to repeat this performance in Srinagar at a CRPF camp in which 1 jawan was martyred.
After this incident, as it happens every time, the Defence Minister Nirmala Sitaraman, Home Minister Rajnath Singh and many others got busy in doing a lot of atmamanthan as to how to teach Pakistan a lesson. Every time after a Pakistan sponsored jehadi attack, this process gets repeated. Then it dies its own death with things carrying on as usual waiting for the next jehadi attack to happen.
On Saturday early morning, about four jehadis of JeM, all from Pakistan but operating for last few months from Pulwama in the Kashmir Valley, approached the 36 Brigade camp of Tiger Division, located in Sunjwan on the Jammu-Srinagar highway and entered it from behind making use of a nallah. As a barricade there was no wall at this place except steel plates. Their mission was to blow up the ammunition dump of the Brigade which they did not succeed in due to being detected. So they got holed up in family quarters of the Brigade.
They were eventually all killed but it took the army three days to complete the cleanup. In doing so, the Army lost six of its soldiers and one civilian was also killed. On Monday, while this operation was still on two jehadis of Lashkar-e-Taiba tried to enter a CRPF camp in Srinagar. They were also detected but in the exchange of fire one CRPF constable was martyred.
Once again India has all the proof available including the transcript of instructions being passed to them from the Pakistani side as to what to do. These jehadis belonged to the JeM and Lashkar-e-Taiba, who operate under directions of the Pakistani Army and the ISI. In fact they can be rightfully considered as foot soldiers of the Pakistani Army without uniform.
On the Indian side, as is our policy, after such incidents, unending rounds of meetings start at the highest level. Defence Minister Nirmala Sitaraman has said that Pakistan will be made to pay a price, as if Pakistan cares about what she has to say!
The problem with India and its netas is that all our policies concerning Pakistan are reactive in nature and not proactive. The Indian Army and the BSF get a free hand on the LOC and International border only after mischief has been created by Pakistan and not at all time. The Pakistani Army knows that the Indian Army will cross the border for a surgical strike only in retaliation to a border violation of some magnitude. If fear that Indian Army can cross the border at will to carry out more surgical strikes is instilled in Pakistani soldiers' minds, will they still encourage cross border infiltration?
The Pakistani Army is so scared of releasing details of the casualties suffered by them in India's retaliatory actions, that they have even denied releasing such details to the country's Parliament, despite it asking for the same.
If India tells Pakistan that it is withdrawing Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status it has given to Pakistan, which Pakistan has not given to India; if India tells Pakistan that it is going to review the Indus Water Treaty in which Pakistan is getting lion's share of water from six rivers, will Pakistan still sponsor cross border terror?
What India needs is resolute political will and strategic one window military advice given to Indian political masters from Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) system lying sanctioned since 2003 but is yet to be implemented!
Indian Army's fear should be instilled in Pakistani soldiers
On Saturday, 10 February, Pakistan sponsored jehadi organisation Jaish-e-Mohammad attacked Sunjwan Army camp on the outskirts of Jammu, martyring seven people including six soldiers and one civilian.
Even before this attack was over by Monday, with all three jehadis being killed, jehadis of Lashkar-e-Taiba tried to repeat this performance in Srinagar at a CRPF camp in which 1 jawan was martyred.
After this incident, as it happens every time, the Defence Minister Nirmala Sitaraman, Home Minister Rajnath Singh and many others got busy in doing a lot of atmamanthan as to how to teach Pakistan a lesson. Every time after a Pakistan sponsored jehadi attack, this process gets repeated. Then it dies its own death with things carrying on as usual waiting for the next jehadi attack to happen.
On Saturday early morning, about four jehadis of JeM, all from Pakistan but operating for last few months from Pulwama in the Kashmir Valley, approached the 36 Brigade camp of Tiger Division, located in Sunjwan on the Jammu-Srinagar highway and entered it from behind making use of a nallah. As a barricade there was no wall at this place except steel plates. Their mission was to blow up the ammunition dump of the Brigade which they did not succeed in due to being detected. So they got holed up in family quarters of the Brigade.
They were eventually all killed but it took the army three days to complete the cleanup. In doing so, the Army lost six of its soldiers and one civilian was also killed. On Monday, while this operation was still on two jehadis of Lashkar-e-Taiba tried to enter a CRPF camp in Srinagar. They were also detected but in the exchange of fire one CRPF constable was martyred.
Once again India has all the proof available including the transcript of instructions being passed to them from the Pakistani side as to what to do. These jehadis belonged to the JeM and Lashkar-e-Taiba, who operate under directions of the Pakistani Army and the ISI. In fact they can be rightfully considered as foot soldiers of the Pakistani Army without uniform.
On the Indian side, as is our policy, after such incidents, unending rounds of meetings start at the highest level. Defence Minister Nirmala Sitaraman has said that Pakistan will be made to pay a price, as if Pakistan cares about what she has to say!
The problem with India and its netas is that all our policies concerning Pakistan are reactive in nature and not proactive. The Indian Army and the BSF get a free hand on the LOC and International border only after mischief has been created by Pakistan and not at all time. The Pakistani Army knows that the Indian Army will cross the border for a surgical strike only in retaliation to a border violation of some magnitude. If fear that Indian Army can cross the border at will to carry out more surgical strikes is instilled in Pakistani soldiers' minds, will they still encourage cross border infiltration?
The Pakistani Army is so scared of releasing details of the casualties suffered by them in India's retaliatory actions, that they have even denied releasing such details to the country's Parliament, despite it asking for the same.
If India tells Pakistan that it is withdrawing Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status it has given to Pakistan, which Pakistan has not given to India; if India tells Pakistan that it is going to review the Indus Water Treaty in which Pakistan is getting lion's share of water from six rivers, will Pakistan still sponsor cross border terror?
What India needs is resolute political will and strategic one window military advice given to Indian political masters from Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) system lying sanctioned since 2003 but is yet to be implemented!
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nat...women-in-indian-army-recruitment-1771305.html
Centre denies discrimination against women in Indian Army recruitment
NEW DELHI: The Centre has opposed in the Delhi High Court two petitions that allege discrimination against women in the Army's recruitment policy related to its engineering and education corps.
A bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal was told that the allegation of discrimination against women in Indian Army with respect to their recruitment in the force is "baseless, unfounded and devoid of merit".
The Army sought dismissal of the two PILs filed by a lawyer that have alleged "institutionalised discrimination" against women by the Army as it does not recruit them into the two corps by giving them a permanent commission.
However, the Indian Army maintained that it has in "1992 introduced women special entry scheme (officers) for induction of short service commission (women officers)", under the appropriate provisions of the law.
"Prior to this there was no provisions of entry of women officers to the Indian Army," the ministry added.
Advocate Kush Kalra said that, "This discrimination on grounds of gender is violative of fundamental right of equality before law, the right not to be discriminated on the ground of sex, the equality of opportunity in the matters of public employment, the right to practice any profession and occupation and the human rights of the women."
Women candidates are denied entry into the Engineering Corps under the 10+2 Technical Entry and the University Entry schemes in contrast to their male counterparts, one of the petitions said.
The lawyer in his other plea has said the reason given by the Army for not recruiting women is that they are not eligible for permanent commission in the army while the Army Educational Corps is a permanent commission.
The petitioner has sought an order declaring the Indian Army's eligibility conditions which disentitle women from being recruited in the Army Educational Corps as void, since they are inconsistent with the fundamental rights of women.
In his other plea relating to entry of women into the Engineering Corps, the petitioner has said the advertisement inviting application for recruitment only mentions male candidates and not female.
"As per the eligibility criteria only unmarried male candidates are eligible for recruitment to the 10+2 Technical Entry and University Entry schemes (both for permanent commissions), which in-fact means no female with equivalent qualification are eligible.
"This practice is discriminatory. The respondents (MoD and Army) are treating equals unequally. It is arbitrary and discriminatory against women," the petition on Engineering Corps said.
Kalra has also sought an order declaring the eligibility conditions for recruiting unmarried males alone in the Engineering Corps under the two entry schemes for a permanent commission as unconstitutional.
Centre denies discrimination against women in Indian Army recruitment
NEW DELHI: The Centre has opposed in the Delhi High Court two petitions that allege discrimination against women in the Army's recruitment policy related to its engineering and education corps.
A bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal was told that the allegation of discrimination against women in Indian Army with respect to their recruitment in the force is "baseless, unfounded and devoid of merit".
The Army sought dismissal of the two PILs filed by a lawyer that have alleged "institutionalised discrimination" against women by the Army as it does not recruit them into the two corps by giving them a permanent commission.
However, the Indian Army maintained that it has in "1992 introduced women special entry scheme (officers) for induction of short service commission (women officers)", under the appropriate provisions of the law.
"Prior to this there was no provisions of entry of women officers to the Indian Army," the ministry added.
Advocate Kush Kalra said that, "This discrimination on grounds of gender is violative of fundamental right of equality before law, the right not to be discriminated on the ground of sex, the equality of opportunity in the matters of public employment, the right to practice any profession and occupation and the human rights of the women."
Women candidates are denied entry into the Engineering Corps under the 10+2 Technical Entry and the University Entry schemes in contrast to their male counterparts, one of the petitions said.
The lawyer in his other plea has said the reason given by the Army for not recruiting women is that they are not eligible for permanent commission in the army while the Army Educational Corps is a permanent commission.
The petitioner has sought an order declaring the Indian Army's eligibility conditions which disentitle women from being recruited in the Army Educational Corps as void, since they are inconsistent with the fundamental rights of women.
In his other plea relating to entry of women into the Engineering Corps, the petitioner has said the advertisement inviting application for recruitment only mentions male candidates and not female.
"As per the eligibility criteria only unmarried male candidates are eligible for recruitment to the 10+2 Technical Entry and University Entry schemes (both for permanent commissions), which in-fact means no female with equivalent qualification are eligible.
"This practice is discriminatory. The respondents (MoD and Army) are treating equals unequally. It is arbitrary and discriminatory against women," the petition on Engineering Corps said.
Kalra has also sought an order declaring the eligibility conditions for recruiting unmarried males alone in the Engineering Corps under the two entry schemes for a permanent commission as unconstitutional.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...nger-report/story-JSWeQtP6SfNsuQ1wWqx31K.html
India overtakes UK in defence spending, China remains a major challenger: Report
India has the fifth largest defence budget in the world, at $52.5 billion in 2017 ($51.1 billion in 2016), overtaking the UK whose defence budget fell from $52.5 billion in 2016 to $50.7 billion in 2017.
India has overtaken the United Kingdom in defence spending and broken into the top five, but faces considerable lag in comparison to China, which is increasingly challenging Western dominance, a new report on military balance said on Wednesday.
The annual report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) sees China and Russia challenging the global dominance of the United States and its allies. IISS director-general John Chipman said while great-power war is not inevitable, the three leading military powers are "systematically preparing for the possibility of conflict".
India has the fifth largest defence budget in the world, at $52.5 billion in 2017 ($51.1 billion in 2016), overtaking the UK whose defence budget fell from $52.5 billion in 2016 to $50.7 billion in 2017.
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which compiles authoritative reports on annual military spending, India’s expenditure on defence was greater than that of the UK in 2016.
Titled Military Balance 2018, the IISS report details China’s growing military prowess, particularly at sea, adding that Beijing was on track to begin operating the Chengdu J-20 low-observable combat aircraft in frontline squadrons by 2020. “If this happens, the US would lose its monopoly on operational stealthy combat aircraft,” the report said.
Top 5 global defence spenders (in US $ billions)
He was referring to last year’s standoff between Indian and Chinese border troops at Doklam near the Sikkim border that lasted more than 70 days.
“These technologies do not simply seek to catch up with the West, but to challenge traditional Western military dominance. India's traditional influence over the Indian Ocean is also being challenged by China's shipbuilding. Since 2000, China has built more submarines, destroyers, frigates and corvettes than India, Japan and South Korea combined," Roy-Chaudhury said.
On India overtaking the UK in defence spending, Roy-Chaudhury said: "This indicates a shift in the India-UK military power balance in the transition towards Brexit, whereby India is focusing more on developing military resources regionally than the UK is globally."
The report noted that a new Indian joint armed forces doctrine was issued in 2017, much of which was consistent with similar US and NATO doctrines. It sets out the joint doctrine for Indian nuclear command and control, and sees an “emerging triad” of space, cyber and special operations capabilities complementing conventional land, sea and air capabilities.
“A defence space agency, defence cyber agency and special operations division are to be formed,” it said, but added the Indian Army’s overall capability is limited by inadequate logistics and shortages of ammunition and spare parts.
“Development and procurement programmes across the services are aimed at replacing ageing equipment, but many projects have experienced significant delays and cost overruns, particularly indigenous systems,” the report added.
India overtakes UK in defence spending, China remains a major challenger: Report
India has the fifth largest defence budget in the world, at $52.5 billion in 2017 ($51.1 billion in 2016), overtaking the UK whose defence budget fell from $52.5 billion in 2016 to $50.7 billion in 2017.
India has overtaken the United Kingdom in defence spending and broken into the top five, but faces considerable lag in comparison to China, which is increasingly challenging Western dominance, a new report on military balance said on Wednesday.
The annual report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) sees China and Russia challenging the global dominance of the United States and its allies. IISS director-general John Chipman said while great-power war is not inevitable, the three leading military powers are "systematically preparing for the possibility of conflict".
India has the fifth largest defence budget in the world, at $52.5 billion in 2017 ($51.1 billion in 2016), overtaking the UK whose defence budget fell from $52.5 billion in 2016 to $50.7 billion in 2017.
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which compiles authoritative reports on annual military spending, India’s expenditure on defence was greater than that of the UK in 2016.
Titled Military Balance 2018, the IISS report details China’s growing military prowess, particularly at sea, adding that Beijing was on track to begin operating the Chengdu J-20 low-observable combat aircraft in frontline squadrons by 2020. “If this happens, the US would lose its monopoly on operational stealthy combat aircraft,” the report said.
Top 5 global defence spenders (in US $ billions)
- United States 602.8
- China 150.5
- Saudi Arabia 76.7
- Russia 61.2
- India 52.5
- (Source: International Institute for Strategic Studies, London)
He was referring to last year’s standoff between Indian and Chinese border troops at Doklam near the Sikkim border that lasted more than 70 days.
“These technologies do not simply seek to catch up with the West, but to challenge traditional Western military dominance. India's traditional influence over the Indian Ocean is also being challenged by China's shipbuilding. Since 2000, China has built more submarines, destroyers, frigates and corvettes than India, Japan and South Korea combined," Roy-Chaudhury said.
On India overtaking the UK in defence spending, Roy-Chaudhury said: "This indicates a shift in the India-UK military power balance in the transition towards Brexit, whereby India is focusing more on developing military resources regionally than the UK is globally."
The report noted that a new Indian joint armed forces doctrine was issued in 2017, much of which was consistent with similar US and NATO doctrines. It sets out the joint doctrine for Indian nuclear command and control, and sees an “emerging triad” of space, cyber and special operations capabilities complementing conventional land, sea and air capabilities.
“A defence space agency, defence cyber agency and special operations division are to be formed,” it said, but added the Indian Army’s overall capability is limited by inadequate logistics and shortages of ammunition and spare parts.
“Development and procurement programmes across the services are aimed at replacing ageing equipment, but many projects have experienced significant delays and cost overruns, particularly indigenous systems,” the report added.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
http://zeenews.india.com/india/repo...l-pure-speculation-army-official-2081269.html
Reports of Pakistan’s ISI ‘honey trapping’ Lt Colonel pure speculation: Army official
A preliminary enquiry was ordered on February 12 by the Indian Army to ascertain facts on suspected leakage of classified information.
A day after reports of an Army officer being detained in Jabalpur over alleged honey trap by Pakistan’s spy agency ISI, a senior official of the Indian Army has said that the Lieutenant Colonel would continue to perform his routine duties in unit as he was only questioned as part of an ongoing enquiry.
The senior official said that “reports of detention of officer, honey trapping and money exchange at this stage are pure speculation and neither accurate nor substantiated”. He added, “Details on the outcome of the enquiry will be intimated in due course as per progress.”
According to him, a preliminary enquiry was ordered on February 12 by the Indian Army to ascertain facts on suspected leakage of classified information from IT devices of the Lieutenant
Colonel in Jabalpur. “It is yet to be established whether it has happened inadvertently or deliberately as reported,” said the senior Army official.
He added that digital evidence related to the case has been seized and sent for further forensic analysis.
On Wednesday, Defence PRO, Allahabad, Wing Commander Arvind Sinha had said that the officer was being questioned "after he was picked up from Jabalpur by the Army HQ team last (Tuesday) night".
The officer, however, refused to disclose details. "We are not in a position to clarify the exact reason behind this episode at present," Wing Commander Sinha said when asked whether it was a case of ‘honey trap’.
"The officer is being questioned and is under grilling at present," the PRO had said. The officer also refused to share whether the Lt. Colonel was taken to Lucknow for further questioning or is in Jabalpur.
The Lt Colonel has reportedly been accused of transferring crucial and confidential information of the Indian army to Pakistan's ISI. According to reports, the detained armyman allegedly got into a honey trap by Pakistan’s spy agency ISI and shared information that were confidential.
Reports of Pakistan’s ISI ‘honey trapping’ Lt Colonel pure speculation: Army official
A preliminary enquiry was ordered on February 12 by the Indian Army to ascertain facts on suspected leakage of classified information.
A day after reports of an Army officer being detained in Jabalpur over alleged honey trap by Pakistan’s spy agency ISI, a senior official of the Indian Army has said that the Lieutenant Colonel would continue to perform his routine duties in unit as he was only questioned as part of an ongoing enquiry.
The senior official said that “reports of detention of officer, honey trapping and money exchange at this stage are pure speculation and neither accurate nor substantiated”. He added, “Details on the outcome of the enquiry will be intimated in due course as per progress.”
According to him, a preliminary enquiry was ordered on February 12 by the Indian Army to ascertain facts on suspected leakage of classified information from IT devices of the Lieutenant
Colonel in Jabalpur. “It is yet to be established whether it has happened inadvertently or deliberately as reported,” said the senior Army official.
He added that digital evidence related to the case has been seized and sent for further forensic analysis.
On Wednesday, Defence PRO, Allahabad, Wing Commander Arvind Sinha had said that the officer was being questioned "after he was picked up from Jabalpur by the Army HQ team last (Tuesday) night".
The officer, however, refused to disclose details. "We are not in a position to clarify the exact reason behind this episode at present," Wing Commander Sinha said when asked whether it was a case of ‘honey trap’.
"The officer is being questioned and is under grilling at present," the PRO had said. The officer also refused to share whether the Lt. Colonel was taken to Lucknow for further questioning or is in Jabalpur.
The Lt Colonel has reportedly been accused of transferring crucial and confidential information of the Indian army to Pakistan's ISI. According to reports, the detained armyman allegedly got into a honey trap by Pakistan’s spy agency ISI and shared information that were confidential.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
https://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/no-sermon-of-serenity-at-arch-of-terror/299835
No Sermon Of Serenity At Arch Of Terror
Fidayeen attacks are on the rise in J&K. Many feel the Centre can be less hard in its take on militancy.
Not that the offensive was completely out of the blue. It was anyway public knowledge that this February 9 would mark the fifth death anniversary of Afzal Guru. The Kashmiri separatist was hanged on that day in 2013 in Delhi after the country’s highest judiciary upheld a verdict against the 43-year-old imprisoned for his involvement in the 2001 Parliament attack. Ahead of the anniversary this time, intelligence agencies as well as the state police had sounded a high alert about possible strikes anywhere in Jammu and Kashmir.
Then, just as the day got over technically, a pre-dawn fidayeen attack on February 10 killed six soldiers at the Sunjuwan military base close to Jammu city. In a jiffy, militants managed to show yet again that they are capable of sabotage at any spot, however fortified and alert. The raid at 36 brigade of the Jammu and Kashmir infantry around 4.45 a.m. also killed three fidayeen men and the father of a soldier, while ten others (including women and children) residing at the army camp were wounded.
Senior intelligence officials in the J&K Police say the attack was carried out by an Afzal Guru Squad of the militant outfit Jaish-e-Mohammad. Ahead of the February 10 encounter, the militants had written on the wall of an isolated army building in Jammu slogans such as “Afzal Guru” and “Go India Go Back”. In the wee hours of that wintry Saturday, the heavily armed attackers breached security and made their way towards the family quarters of the army personnel. The next three days were punctuated with heavy exchange of fire that killed the three militants.
The Jaish men were in for a long haul: they were carrying not just weapons, but even food. It was Pakistan-based JeM’s second major attack in the state this year—the first (January 1) being on Lethpora camp in Pulwama district of south Kashmir that killed five CRPF personnel. The Sunjuwan incident led defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman to visit Jammu on February 12. Holding Islamabad responsible for the attack, she said Pakistan would have to pay for the misadventure. Handlers from across the border control the militants, she said, accusing the western neighbour of expanding the “arch of terror” to areas south of Jammu’s Pir Panjal range in the inner Himalayan region.
That is around 250 km south of Sopore, which is close to the native place of Afzal whom the Congress-led UPA government had hanged in Delhi’s Tihar jail without informing his family. The “out-of-turn” execution invited objections from both the National Conference (NC) that then ran the J&K government and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which now leads the government. Both the regional parties had maintained that hanging Afzal will have long-term negative consequences in the already-restive Valley. Five years thence, the apprehensions are proving right: the number of local militants is rising. In 2013, the Kashmiri youths who joined militancy totalled 16, while it was 127 last year alone, according to chief minister Mehbooba Mufti. In fact, the JeM—as a baby of Pakistan’s ISI agency, according to intelligence agencies—has been continuously carrying out fidayeen attacks since its inception in 1998 (see the bullet box on page 18).
A senior police officer says the JeM believes that its suicide attacks on India’s army camps and other security installations will create an impact that would last for some time. “They have been quite successful in it, but the Jaish is not invincible,” he tells Outlook. “We have killed 30 JeM militants—21 in south Kashmir and nine in Budgam during 2016 and ’17.” The police assess that it requires cross-border infiltration to stop for the Jaish to discontinue its activities. “If you kill 30, an equal number will sneak in. It is not that easy (to infiltrate), but it’s possible,” he says.
Indeed, just as the gunfight in Sunjuwan base concluded on February 12, two militants tried to storm a CRPF camp at Karanagar area of Srinagar that morning. An alert sentry fired back, forcing the ultras to rush into a nearby building that they turned into a fortified bunker. The ensuing gunfight killed a paramilitary jawan. The attack, amid tight vigil, was claimed by Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT)—and points towards militant penetration in urban centres.
Only a week earlier, two policemen were killed when they were taking top LeT militant Naveed Jatt to hospital from the Srinagar Central Jail for medical check-up. A militant, who was waiting for 22-year-old Naveed’s entry at the hospital, suddenly handed him over a pistol. Both fled, after shooting dead the two cops. The police say the three-decade-old LeT is in “desperate need” of a commander having lost some of its top operators from Abu Qasim to Abu Dujana to Abu Ismail. “Naveed, after the escape, went to the Hizbul Mujahideen. This shows both Hizb and the LeT operate together,” notes additional director general of police Munir Khan. Naveed, who was arrested in 2014, is a militant known for carrying attacks on the police and security forces. Considered as a “sharp and extremely well-trained commando”, he “can dismantle and then assemble an AK-47 rifle blindfolded within 45 seconds”.
Of late, there is resurgence in militancy even as the police and the army continue with their operations across Kashmir. People in the Valley have a growing perception that a hard government stance against Pakistan and separatists booked under the National Investigation Agency has further worsened the situation.
On February 12, the CM was more than blunt when she told the assembly that security forces and the army should not be blamed when fidayeen attacks take place. “If someone comes to get killed and to kill, what will foolproof security do to him?” she said, and wanted the Centre to hold talks with Pakistan. Mehbooba further said the people of the state have been caught in a web of violence for the past 30 years and it was out of this pain that they have been demanding dialogue so as to better Indo-Pak relations. “For how long shall the people continue to die? For how long shall we be laying wreaths?” she said in a loud, emotional tone. “Not wars but reachouts hold the key to peace and friendship.”
The CM also accused the TV channels of using ‘Kashmir’ for TRP. “It will have consequences for the state and the country,” she added, effectively raising a huge question mark over the BJP-led NDA government’s policies on Kashmir as well as Pakistan.
Observes say Prime Minister Narendra Modi has entirely changed the texture of New Delhi’s Kashmir policy though the PDP—the saffron party’s coalition partner in the J&K—has repeatedly been calling for a different approach. They note that the NDA regime’s “hard” approach towards Kashmir has obliterated the space for non-militant voices, thus giving a new life to militancy. “It has taken Kashmir back to the 1990s,” says an academic, not wanting to be named.
Some experts argue that the Modi government’s approach has, unwittingly, snatched from the state one of its most effective weapons: fear. More than its weapons and war-planes, it was fear of the state that had prevented militancy from turning into a mass insurrection, according to them. Today, the government’s “militaristic” approach—resounding with usages like ‘all-out operation’ and ‘anti-separatists drive’—has led the people to reciprocate bare-chested to the challenges of loaded guns. “The situation is so grave that you don’t know who is a militant and who is not,” says a police official. The government’s constant refrain of ‘no’ to everything from internal to external talks has also eliminated from the minds of most people the hope that the country’s secular polity can one day accommodate Kashmiri aspirations through the tenacious process of dialogue.
“The Centre has alienated Kashmiris by using Hindutva as a directive principle of the state policy, threatening people by sending Sangh-affiliates to the Supreme Court to revoke Articles 370 and 35(A),” says the academic, referring respectively to the constitutional provisions that give the autonomy to J&K and empowers its legislature to define the state’s “permanent residents”.
“The Centre has also alienated those Kashmiris struggling to juggle their Muslim identity with undeclared Indian-ness. This has further reduced the prospect of de-escalation in the immediate future,” he adds, citing seasoned NC politician Akbar Lone, who has been speaker of the State Assembly, as an example. On February 10, Lone shouted pro-Pakistan slogans in the assembly when the BJP accused Rohingyas and other Muslims living around the Sunjuwan camp of facilitating the attack.
The Opposition NC bemoans that the Centre’s approach towards Kashmir has begun to discredit reconciliation as an evil; instead it’s drawing jingoism as the baseline of patriotism. “The BJP has itself ridiculed the government’s announcement of the new Kashmir interlocutor (Dineshwar Sharma). Even some key ministers and those close to the PM aren’t amused,” NC state spokesman Junaid Azim Mattu tells Outlook. “Between the optics of reconciliation and macho nationalism, the Kashmir issue has been made more complex.”
The policy on engagement with Pakistan, too, has been “inconsistent and unrealistic”, according to Mattu. “Amid the PM’s features of spontaneous visits to Pakistan, the government’s approach of surgical strikes and the BJP using its anti-Pakistan rhetoric during various elections, one wonders if the central government realises the grave costs of this prolonged stalemate and hostility. Their costs have to be borne by the people along the LoC and the international border.” The upcoming polls to various state assemblies will show whether the Centre will use Kashmir and Pakistan as electoral gambits instead of pursuing Mehbooba’s idea of a serious engagement or dialogue based on the motto of “war is no option”.
After all, Pakistan-sponsored fidayeen attacks have particularly gained momentum since 2014. Towards the end of that year, on December 5 (on the eve of the anniversary of the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition) six Jaish militants entered an army camp in north Kashmir’s Uri, killing eight soldiers and three policemen. Then, in September 2016, a Jaish attack at the Uri Brigade headquarters killed 18 army men and wounded 22.
Before the Lethpora attack on the first day of this year, Jaish’s Fardeen Khanday (who got killed along with another militant) had made a video urging Kashmiri youth and Muslims across the country to join the “fight against India”. The eight-minute clip has 16-year-old Fardeen saying that militancy has no connection with unemployment “as is being fabricated by New Delhi; it is rather a reply to Kashmir’s illegal control by India’’. Towards its end, the teenager, who had joined militancy in mid-September last year, hails Afzal Guru and LeT founder Maulana Masood Azhar. The violence keeps taking uncanny cycles.
***
Suicide Attackers Seldom Fail In Their Mission
A February 10 fidayeen attack on Jammu’s Sunjuwan camp claimed 10 lives, six of them armymen. Here is a list of similar instances in J&K:
No Sermon Of Serenity At Arch Of Terror
Fidayeen attacks are on the rise in J&K. Many feel the Centre can be less hard in its take on militancy.
Not that the offensive was completely out of the blue. It was anyway public knowledge that this February 9 would mark the fifth death anniversary of Afzal Guru. The Kashmiri separatist was hanged on that day in 2013 in Delhi after the country’s highest judiciary upheld a verdict against the 43-year-old imprisoned for his involvement in the 2001 Parliament attack. Ahead of the anniversary this time, intelligence agencies as well as the state police had sounded a high alert about possible strikes anywhere in Jammu and Kashmir.
Then, just as the day got over technically, a pre-dawn fidayeen attack on February 10 killed six soldiers at the Sunjuwan military base close to Jammu city. In a jiffy, militants managed to show yet again that they are capable of sabotage at any spot, however fortified and alert. The raid at 36 brigade of the Jammu and Kashmir infantry around 4.45 a.m. also killed three fidayeen men and the father of a soldier, while ten others (including women and children) residing at the army camp were wounded.
Senior intelligence officials in the J&K Police say the attack was carried out by an Afzal Guru Squad of the militant outfit Jaish-e-Mohammad. Ahead of the February 10 encounter, the militants had written on the wall of an isolated army building in Jammu slogans such as “Afzal Guru” and “Go India Go Back”. In the wee hours of that wintry Saturday, the heavily armed attackers breached security and made their way towards the family quarters of the army personnel. The next three days were punctuated with heavy exchange of fire that killed the three militants.
The Jaish men were in for a long haul: they were carrying not just weapons, but even food. It was Pakistan-based JeM’s second major attack in the state this year—the first (January 1) being on Lethpora camp in Pulwama district of south Kashmir that killed five CRPF personnel. The Sunjuwan incident led defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman to visit Jammu on February 12. Holding Islamabad responsible for the attack, she said Pakistan would have to pay for the misadventure. Handlers from across the border control the militants, she said, accusing the western neighbour of expanding the “arch of terror” to areas south of Jammu’s Pir Panjal range in the inner Himalayan region.
That is around 250 km south of Sopore, which is close to the native place of Afzal whom the Congress-led UPA government had hanged in Delhi’s Tihar jail without informing his family. The “out-of-turn” execution invited objections from both the National Conference (NC) that then ran the J&K government and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which now leads the government. Both the regional parties had maintained that hanging Afzal will have long-term negative consequences in the already-restive Valley. Five years thence, the apprehensions are proving right: the number of local militants is rising. In 2013, the Kashmiri youths who joined militancy totalled 16, while it was 127 last year alone, according to chief minister Mehbooba Mufti. In fact, the JeM—as a baby of Pakistan’s ISI agency, according to intelligence agencies—has been continuously carrying out fidayeen attacks since its inception in 1998 (see the bullet box on page 18).
A senior police officer says the JeM believes that its suicide attacks on India’s army camps and other security installations will create an impact that would last for some time. “They have been quite successful in it, but the Jaish is not invincible,” he tells Outlook. “We have killed 30 JeM militants—21 in south Kashmir and nine in Budgam during 2016 and ’17.” The police assess that it requires cross-border infiltration to stop for the Jaish to discontinue its activities. “If you kill 30, an equal number will sneak in. It is not that easy (to infiltrate), but it’s possible,” he says.
Indeed, just as the gunfight in Sunjuwan base concluded on February 12, two militants tried to storm a CRPF camp at Karanagar area of Srinagar that morning. An alert sentry fired back, forcing the ultras to rush into a nearby building that they turned into a fortified bunker. The ensuing gunfight killed a paramilitary jawan. The attack, amid tight vigil, was claimed by Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT)—and points towards militant penetration in urban centres.
Only a week earlier, two policemen were killed when they were taking top LeT militant Naveed Jatt to hospital from the Srinagar Central Jail for medical check-up. A militant, who was waiting for 22-year-old Naveed’s entry at the hospital, suddenly handed him over a pistol. Both fled, after shooting dead the two cops. The police say the three-decade-old LeT is in “desperate need” of a commander having lost some of its top operators from Abu Qasim to Abu Dujana to Abu Ismail. “Naveed, after the escape, went to the Hizbul Mujahideen. This shows both Hizb and the LeT operate together,” notes additional director general of police Munir Khan. Naveed, who was arrested in 2014, is a militant known for carrying attacks on the police and security forces. Considered as a “sharp and extremely well-trained commando”, he “can dismantle and then assemble an AK-47 rifle blindfolded within 45 seconds”.
Of late, there is resurgence in militancy even as the police and the army continue with their operations across Kashmir. People in the Valley have a growing perception that a hard government stance against Pakistan and separatists booked under the National Investigation Agency has further worsened the situation.
On February 12, the CM was more than blunt when she told the assembly that security forces and the army should not be blamed when fidayeen attacks take place. “If someone comes to get killed and to kill, what will foolproof security do to him?” she said, and wanted the Centre to hold talks with Pakistan. Mehbooba further said the people of the state have been caught in a web of violence for the past 30 years and it was out of this pain that they have been demanding dialogue so as to better Indo-Pak relations. “For how long shall the people continue to die? For how long shall we be laying wreaths?” she said in a loud, emotional tone. “Not wars but reachouts hold the key to peace and friendship.”
The CM also accused the TV channels of using ‘Kashmir’ for TRP. “It will have consequences for the state and the country,” she added, effectively raising a huge question mark over the BJP-led NDA government’s policies on Kashmir as well as Pakistan.
Observes say Prime Minister Narendra Modi has entirely changed the texture of New Delhi’s Kashmir policy though the PDP—the saffron party’s coalition partner in the J&K—has repeatedly been calling for a different approach. They note that the NDA regime’s “hard” approach towards Kashmir has obliterated the space for non-militant voices, thus giving a new life to militancy. “It has taken Kashmir back to the 1990s,” says an academic, not wanting to be named.
Some experts argue that the Modi government’s approach has, unwittingly, snatched from the state one of its most effective weapons: fear. More than its weapons and war-planes, it was fear of the state that had prevented militancy from turning into a mass insurrection, according to them. Today, the government’s “militaristic” approach—resounding with usages like ‘all-out operation’ and ‘anti-separatists drive’—has led the people to reciprocate bare-chested to the challenges of loaded guns. “The situation is so grave that you don’t know who is a militant and who is not,” says a police official. The government’s constant refrain of ‘no’ to everything from internal to external talks has also eliminated from the minds of most people the hope that the country’s secular polity can one day accommodate Kashmiri aspirations through the tenacious process of dialogue.
“The Centre has alienated Kashmiris by using Hindutva as a directive principle of the state policy, threatening people by sending Sangh-affiliates to the Supreme Court to revoke Articles 370 and 35(A),” says the academic, referring respectively to the constitutional provisions that give the autonomy to J&K and empowers its legislature to define the state’s “permanent residents”.
“The Centre has also alienated those Kashmiris struggling to juggle their Muslim identity with undeclared Indian-ness. This has further reduced the prospect of de-escalation in the immediate future,” he adds, citing seasoned NC politician Akbar Lone, who has been speaker of the State Assembly, as an example. On February 10, Lone shouted pro-Pakistan slogans in the assembly when the BJP accused Rohingyas and other Muslims living around the Sunjuwan camp of facilitating the attack.
The Opposition NC bemoans that the Centre’s approach towards Kashmir has begun to discredit reconciliation as an evil; instead it’s drawing jingoism as the baseline of patriotism. “The BJP has itself ridiculed the government’s announcement of the new Kashmir interlocutor (Dineshwar Sharma). Even some key ministers and those close to the PM aren’t amused,” NC state spokesman Junaid Azim Mattu tells Outlook. “Between the optics of reconciliation and macho nationalism, the Kashmir issue has been made more complex.”
The policy on engagement with Pakistan, too, has been “inconsistent and unrealistic”, according to Mattu. “Amid the PM’s features of spontaneous visits to Pakistan, the government’s approach of surgical strikes and the BJP using its anti-Pakistan rhetoric during various elections, one wonders if the central government realises the grave costs of this prolonged stalemate and hostility. Their costs have to be borne by the people along the LoC and the international border.” The upcoming polls to various state assemblies will show whether the Centre will use Kashmir and Pakistan as electoral gambits instead of pursuing Mehbooba’s idea of a serious engagement or dialogue based on the motto of “war is no option”.
After all, Pakistan-sponsored fidayeen attacks have particularly gained momentum since 2014. Towards the end of that year, on December 5 (on the eve of the anniversary of the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition) six Jaish militants entered an army camp in north Kashmir’s Uri, killing eight soldiers and three policemen. Then, in September 2016, a Jaish attack at the Uri Brigade headquarters killed 18 army men and wounded 22.
Before the Lethpora attack on the first day of this year, Jaish’s Fardeen Khanday (who got killed along with another militant) had made a video urging Kashmiri youth and Muslims across the country to join the “fight against India”. The eight-minute clip has 16-year-old Fardeen saying that militancy has no connection with unemployment “as is being fabricated by New Delhi; it is rather a reply to Kashmir’s illegal control by India’’. Towards its end, the teenager, who had joined militancy in mid-September last year, hails Afzal Guru and LeT founder Maulana Masood Azhar. The violence keeps taking uncanny cycles.
***
Suicide Attackers Seldom Fail In Their Mission
A February 10 fidayeen attack on Jammu’s Sunjuwan camp claimed 10 lives, six of them armymen. Here is a list of similar instances in J&K:
- November 3, 1999 Eight armymen killed, as fidayeen attack Badamibagh headquarters of army’s 15 Corps in Srinagar
- September 17, 2001 Nine policemen of J&K Police’s elite counter-insurgency force Special Operations Group killed when fidayeen attack their camp at Handwara in Kupwara district of north Kashmir
- May 14, 2002 31 people killed and 48 injured, as three militants storm an army cantonment at Kalucheck in Jammu
- July 22, 2003 Eight army personnel, including a Brigadier, killed and 12 (including four generals, a brigadier and two colonels)injured when fidayeen storm an army camp at Akhnoor in Jammu
- July 19, 2008 10 soldiers killed and 20 injured when militants target an army convoy at Narbal along the Srinagar-Baramulla national highway in Budgam district after detonating an IED
- June 24, 2013 Ten soldiers killed and 12 injured when two militants attack an army convoy at Hyderpora bypass in Srinagar. The militants manage to escape.
- September 25, 2013 Nine people, including a lieutenant colonel and four policemen, killed in twin fidayeen attacks by militants in Jammu’s Samba and Kathua. All the three militants killed later.
- December 5, 2014 Eight soldiers and three policemen killed when militants storm the army’s camp at Uri near the Line of Control. The attack was claimed by the Jaish-e-Mohammad. Six Jaishmilitants also killed.
- June 26, 2016 Eight CRPF men killed and 22 injured when fidayeen attack a CRPF convoy at Pampore on the Srinagar-Jammu national highway. Two fidayeen also killed in the attack.
- September 18, 2016 Heavily armed militants carry out an attack at Uri Brigade, close to Line of Control in north Kashmir, killing 18 armymen and wounding 22
- January 1, 2018 Five CRPF personnel, including an officer, killed in a pre-dawn fidayeen attack by JeM militants on their camp at Lethpora in south Kashmir’s Pulwama district. Two Jaish militants also killed.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
https://swarajyamag.com/defence/tur...ding-a-problem-that-needs-immediateresolution
Defence
Turbulence In Officer Ranks Of The Indian Army: Comprehending A Problem That Needs Immediate Resolution
by Syed Ata Hasnain
There have been a series of reports in the media about restiveness in the ranks of the officer cadre of the Indian Army. Some of these relate to issues regarding equivalence with civil services cadres as also non-functional financial upgradation (NFFU). These are relevant in their own way but do not have an immediate impact on the effectiveness of the force. A much more important issue, which is still under judicial scrutiny, but is causing heartburn and more than sufficient concern is the intra ‘department’ (term used for easier understanding) share of promotion vacancies for select ranks in the officer cadre. Ideally this is an issue completely internal to the Army's cadre management.
However, since there has been some media noise on the subject, a case is in the courts and morale of the Armed Forces is a matter the public has a right to be aware about; I am expressing some basic facts for clarity. Admittedly, not many outside or inside the Army are fully conversant with the issues at stake. I claim that I am one of those who know the issue rather well.
Mercifully for the system, the Army Chief General Bipin Rawat and his current Adjutant General, Lieutenant General Ashwani Kumar, are fully aware of the intricacies having handled policy as staff officers at the Military Secretary’s Branch in their long service experience. Reflective of the seriousness as also a good understanding is the timely Press Information Bureau (PIB) note put out by the Army on 12 October 2017 reassuring its officer cadre that apprehension regarding the Services and other arms not getting their due in the share of promotion vacancies at select ranks was being addressed at the latest Army Commanders’ Conference, which is the highest forum in the Army for addressing policy issues. The fact that a PIB note was issued as against an internal service communication is sensible and projects the seriousness with which the Army appears to be transparently addressing a problem, which is potentially debilitating for the service. What is this issue all about?
From the rank of Colonel and upwards the Army’s rank structure is steeply pyramidal. The ranks are filled through promotion by selection, forcing high attrition rates at every stage. For every rank there are a fixed number of vacancies. Complexity becomes greater in populating the appointments held by various ranks because each of such appointment requires a mix of core experience of the Combat Arm, Combat Support Arm (CSA) or Service to which an officer belongs. These terms relate to the specific department such as Infantry, Armoured Corps or Mechanised Infantry (Combat Arms); Artillery, Engineers, Air Defence Artillery or Signals (CSA); and Ordnance, Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (EME) and Army Service Corps (ASC) which are designated as Services.
The appointments are divided into command, staff and extra regimental employment (ERE). They are specified for a given Combat Arm, CSA or Service on the basis of core competence acquired in pursuance of duties. There are also unspecified appointments which are tenable by all officers irrespective of department. A department’s cadre in a rank consists of the total of specified and unspecified appointments.
With the above minimal explanation, the real issue is the distribution of the sum total of promotion vacancies in each rank. That distribution should ideally ensure two things.
First, that batches of officers with same seniority should pick up higher rank at the near similar service level (years of service).
Second, that there is near similarity in percentage of officers being promoted from a batch but belonging to different departments. This will ensure uniform satisfaction levels for all. A system earlier in existence distributed the vacancies on a pro rata, based upon the total strength of a base rank such as Major from where the officers aspired to rise to the first select rank (Colonel).
That was a fair one but another factor, that of deprivation and risk for the Combat Arms had to be catered for; for that a fixed percentage each of the vacancies accruing to the CSA and Services was deducted and credited to the Combat Arms to keep them marginally ahead in promotion for sake of motivation (it was referred as combat edge). The system worked perfectly well except that much depends on the size of batches of each of these segments which is never uniform. Applying near uniform percentages of approval for promotion skewed the system and in 2001, for example, the ASC was four years ahead of the Infantry in promotion in spite of the combat edge.
After Kargil 1999, there was a need felt for keeping the Combat Arms with younger profile of commanding officers (COs). As additional vacancies accrued from the cadre review done by the Ajay Vikram Singh Committee (AVSC), a different mathematical model was adopted for vacancy distribution as against the combat edge model. This was called the command exit model. The basic assumption here was that more vacancies were needed for the Combat Arms to keep their age profile young (faster turnover) and the tenure shorter because of the greater stress and risk factors in command. There were various other reasons in this model, such as the larger number of command vacancies in some Arms or CSA, which gave a skewed and much higher percentage of vacancies to two entities, the Infantry and Artillery (although the latter is not a Combat Arm).
The result of the decision above was that a very distinct differential emerged in the batch parity between various departments (Arms/Services). Even this would not have created much turbulence because it happened in the past too and is usually a passing phase at a point in time due to batch strength. What really upped the angst was the percentage approval rate in which a very high differential has emerged by virtue of the command exit model. There have been times when in the Infantry and the Artillery 50-55 (or higher) per cent of a batch gets approved for promotion to Colonel.
However, the approval rate for some others such as Engineers, Signals and ASC goes down to well below 30 per cent. This means highly-competent and well-qualified officers of these CSA and Services get stalled as Lt Cols and do not get promoted to even the first select rank of Colonel (14-17 years of service or 36-40 years of age).
Officers who are qualified on the Defence Services Staff College course and also acquired an M Tech degree get stalled at the first level for promotion; obviously a major cause for dismay. That is the crux of the problem which is accentuated further by one other phenomenon, which needs a slight explanation.
The Army has been short of officers now for almost 25 years. Against 21 officers authorised to an Infantry unit on the LoC, only 13-14 are posted. Even this strength is achieved by attaching officers from the Services on commission from the pre-commissioning training academies, for a varying period of one to three years. They do the work of Infantry officers and bear the same risk. Later, in five to 10 years of service, all are required to do a tenure of 30 months with Rashtriya Rifles (RR) or Assam Rifles (AR) in active counter insurgency operations. Thus with approximately five years of operational service they perceive they are as much exposed to risk as Infantry officers. They question the rationale of their lower promotion avenues through lesser percentages. This is a contributory argument in their favour but is not the clinching one under any circumstances because the overall professional content of an officer’s worth does not come only through operational experience. There are many other factors which add to it.
Attempts were made to resolve this problem by scaling down the vacancies of the Infantry and Artillery and distributing these to others as a quick fix but a final decision was never taken; perceptions on the command exit model vary as per Arms/Service loyalty and have divided the officer cadre. It may be good for organisational interest in ensuring lower age profile of the COs of some Arms but organisational interest also includes the overall motivation and morale of the Army. Towards that end, the current situation surely calls for a review.
When a few officers decided to seek the legal route for redress, the Army was reported to have given an affidavit that officers from the Services were non-combatants purportedly because their duties did not entail risks of the combat zone. I have not come across such an affidavit although it is often quoted. This description apparently riled a lot of officers from the Services especially since in the first 10 years of service in the Army, most of them have equal if not more operational service than many Infantry officers, due to attachment only in field conditions and tenures with RR/AR. However, none of this justifies the position taken by some of them that being labelled as non-combatants they were not duty bound to serve in operational conditions. This is an unnecessary, immature, emotional and uncalled for response. No officer of the Indian Army is a non-combatant; such a category does not exist. Every one of them is trained for the first and foremost job of battling the enemy.
The Indian Army, known for its unity in diversity, in more ways than one, cannot afford such responses from within the ranks of its officer cadre. Yet, the question should be why the situation has been allowed to deteriorate to such a level. Obviously hard decisions devoid of any emotions or linkages to parent Arms and colour of lanyards need to be taken. There cannot be such yawning differential in the human resources practices that disallow reasonably uniform aspirations among all who have trained together but entered different Arms and Services due to the requirements of the organisation.
The Army Chief has been extremely mature in issuing the PIB note. He and the Army Commanders, along with the Adjutant General and Military Secretary, are the custodians of the values and ethos of the Army. A consensus decision to review the command exit model, and do it very early, is the call of the hour. An equitable system which still guarantees reasonable command tenures for all and ensures a maximum variation of 10 per cent in the percentage approval rates is something which needs to be sought. In the process, all archaic policies which seem to have outlived their utility need to be reviewed and shelved. In fact, the whole concept of quantified selection system introduced in 2008-2009 needs a fast track review.
An Army doesn’t run only on the basis of the quality of weapons, technology, doctrine and tactics. The men behind all these are far more important. If those men happen to form the leadership of the army then their lack of motivation and morale will ensure that every other advancement is neutralised. Given its resilience and unity, the Army should itself set the issues in order through a consultative approach and prove to the courts that there is no necessity of arbitration in its internal affairs.
Defence
Turbulence In Officer Ranks Of The Indian Army: Comprehending A Problem That Needs Immediate Resolution
by Syed Ata Hasnain
There have been a series of reports in the media about restiveness in the ranks of the officer cadre of the Indian Army. Some of these relate to issues regarding equivalence with civil services cadres as also non-functional financial upgradation (NFFU). These are relevant in their own way but do not have an immediate impact on the effectiveness of the force. A much more important issue, which is still under judicial scrutiny, but is causing heartburn and more than sufficient concern is the intra ‘department’ (term used for easier understanding) share of promotion vacancies for select ranks in the officer cadre. Ideally this is an issue completely internal to the Army's cadre management.
However, since there has been some media noise on the subject, a case is in the courts and morale of the Armed Forces is a matter the public has a right to be aware about; I am expressing some basic facts for clarity. Admittedly, not many outside or inside the Army are fully conversant with the issues at stake. I claim that I am one of those who know the issue rather well.
Mercifully for the system, the Army Chief General Bipin Rawat and his current Adjutant General, Lieutenant General Ashwani Kumar, are fully aware of the intricacies having handled policy as staff officers at the Military Secretary’s Branch in their long service experience. Reflective of the seriousness as also a good understanding is the timely Press Information Bureau (PIB) note put out by the Army on 12 October 2017 reassuring its officer cadre that apprehension regarding the Services and other arms not getting their due in the share of promotion vacancies at select ranks was being addressed at the latest Army Commanders’ Conference, which is the highest forum in the Army for addressing policy issues. The fact that a PIB note was issued as against an internal service communication is sensible and projects the seriousness with which the Army appears to be transparently addressing a problem, which is potentially debilitating for the service. What is this issue all about?
From the rank of Colonel and upwards the Army’s rank structure is steeply pyramidal. The ranks are filled through promotion by selection, forcing high attrition rates at every stage. For every rank there are a fixed number of vacancies. Complexity becomes greater in populating the appointments held by various ranks because each of such appointment requires a mix of core experience of the Combat Arm, Combat Support Arm (CSA) or Service to which an officer belongs. These terms relate to the specific department such as Infantry, Armoured Corps or Mechanised Infantry (Combat Arms); Artillery, Engineers, Air Defence Artillery or Signals (CSA); and Ordnance, Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (EME) and Army Service Corps (ASC) which are designated as Services.
The appointments are divided into command, staff and extra regimental employment (ERE). They are specified for a given Combat Arm, CSA or Service on the basis of core competence acquired in pursuance of duties. There are also unspecified appointments which are tenable by all officers irrespective of department. A department’s cadre in a rank consists of the total of specified and unspecified appointments.
With the above minimal explanation, the real issue is the distribution of the sum total of promotion vacancies in each rank. That distribution should ideally ensure two things.
First, that batches of officers with same seniority should pick up higher rank at the near similar service level (years of service).
Second, that there is near similarity in percentage of officers being promoted from a batch but belonging to different departments. This will ensure uniform satisfaction levels for all. A system earlier in existence distributed the vacancies on a pro rata, based upon the total strength of a base rank such as Major from where the officers aspired to rise to the first select rank (Colonel).
That was a fair one but another factor, that of deprivation and risk for the Combat Arms had to be catered for; for that a fixed percentage each of the vacancies accruing to the CSA and Services was deducted and credited to the Combat Arms to keep them marginally ahead in promotion for sake of motivation (it was referred as combat edge). The system worked perfectly well except that much depends on the size of batches of each of these segments which is never uniform. Applying near uniform percentages of approval for promotion skewed the system and in 2001, for example, the ASC was four years ahead of the Infantry in promotion in spite of the combat edge.
After Kargil 1999, there was a need felt for keeping the Combat Arms with younger profile of commanding officers (COs). As additional vacancies accrued from the cadre review done by the Ajay Vikram Singh Committee (AVSC), a different mathematical model was adopted for vacancy distribution as against the combat edge model. This was called the command exit model. The basic assumption here was that more vacancies were needed for the Combat Arms to keep their age profile young (faster turnover) and the tenure shorter because of the greater stress and risk factors in command. There were various other reasons in this model, such as the larger number of command vacancies in some Arms or CSA, which gave a skewed and much higher percentage of vacancies to two entities, the Infantry and Artillery (although the latter is not a Combat Arm).
The result of the decision above was that a very distinct differential emerged in the batch parity between various departments (Arms/Services). Even this would not have created much turbulence because it happened in the past too and is usually a passing phase at a point in time due to batch strength. What really upped the angst was the percentage approval rate in which a very high differential has emerged by virtue of the command exit model. There have been times when in the Infantry and the Artillery 50-55 (or higher) per cent of a batch gets approved for promotion to Colonel.
However, the approval rate for some others such as Engineers, Signals and ASC goes down to well below 30 per cent. This means highly-competent and well-qualified officers of these CSA and Services get stalled as Lt Cols and do not get promoted to even the first select rank of Colonel (14-17 years of service or 36-40 years of age).
Officers who are qualified on the Defence Services Staff College course and also acquired an M Tech degree get stalled at the first level for promotion; obviously a major cause for dismay. That is the crux of the problem which is accentuated further by one other phenomenon, which needs a slight explanation.
The Army has been short of officers now for almost 25 years. Against 21 officers authorised to an Infantry unit on the LoC, only 13-14 are posted. Even this strength is achieved by attaching officers from the Services on commission from the pre-commissioning training academies, for a varying period of one to three years. They do the work of Infantry officers and bear the same risk. Later, in five to 10 years of service, all are required to do a tenure of 30 months with Rashtriya Rifles (RR) or Assam Rifles (AR) in active counter insurgency operations. Thus with approximately five years of operational service they perceive they are as much exposed to risk as Infantry officers. They question the rationale of their lower promotion avenues through lesser percentages. This is a contributory argument in their favour but is not the clinching one under any circumstances because the overall professional content of an officer’s worth does not come only through operational experience. There are many other factors which add to it.
Attempts were made to resolve this problem by scaling down the vacancies of the Infantry and Artillery and distributing these to others as a quick fix but a final decision was never taken; perceptions on the command exit model vary as per Arms/Service loyalty and have divided the officer cadre. It may be good for organisational interest in ensuring lower age profile of the COs of some Arms but organisational interest also includes the overall motivation and morale of the Army. Towards that end, the current situation surely calls for a review.
When a few officers decided to seek the legal route for redress, the Army was reported to have given an affidavit that officers from the Services were non-combatants purportedly because their duties did not entail risks of the combat zone. I have not come across such an affidavit although it is often quoted. This description apparently riled a lot of officers from the Services especially since in the first 10 years of service in the Army, most of them have equal if not more operational service than many Infantry officers, due to attachment only in field conditions and tenures with RR/AR. However, none of this justifies the position taken by some of them that being labelled as non-combatants they were not duty bound to serve in operational conditions. This is an unnecessary, immature, emotional and uncalled for response. No officer of the Indian Army is a non-combatant; such a category does not exist. Every one of them is trained for the first and foremost job of battling the enemy.
The Indian Army, known for its unity in diversity, in more ways than one, cannot afford such responses from within the ranks of its officer cadre. Yet, the question should be why the situation has been allowed to deteriorate to such a level. Obviously hard decisions devoid of any emotions or linkages to parent Arms and colour of lanyards need to be taken. There cannot be such yawning differential in the human resources practices that disallow reasonably uniform aspirations among all who have trained together but entered different Arms and Services due to the requirements of the organisation.
The Army Chief has been extremely mature in issuing the PIB note. He and the Army Commanders, along with the Adjutant General and Military Secretary, are the custodians of the values and ethos of the Army. A consensus decision to review the command exit model, and do it very early, is the call of the hour. An equitable system which still guarantees reasonable command tenures for all and ensures a maximum variation of 10 per cent in the percentage approval rates is something which needs to be sought. In the process, all archaic policies which seem to have outlived their utility need to be reviewed and shelved. In fact, the whole concept of quantified selection system introduced in 2008-2009 needs a fast track review.
An Army doesn’t run only on the basis of the quality of weapons, technology, doctrine and tactics. The men behind all these are far more important. If those men happen to form the leadership of the army then their lack of motivation and morale will ensure that every other advancement is neutralised. Given its resilience and unity, the Army should itself set the issues in order through a consultative approach and prove to the courts that there is no necessity of arbitration in its internal affairs.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
https://www.indiatoday.in/pti-feed/...-decorated-serving-officer-1154147-2018-01-25
Lt Gen Nimbhorkar gets PVSM, is most decorated serving officer
Mumbai, Jan 25 (PTI) Lieutenant General Rajendra Ramrao Nimbhorkar, Indian Armys Master General of the Ordnance, has been awarded the Param Vishisht Seva Medal for distinguished service, joining the ranks of officers decorated with the most medals for gallantry and distinguished service.
Lt Gen R R Nimbhorkar, presently Master General of the Ordnance (MGO), looking after Armys procurements, has become the only serving officer to get the maximum number of gallantry and distinguished service awards, an official said.
"He has a unique distinction of having received an award at each level of service," the official said.
Hailing from a farming family of Vidarbha region of Maharashtra, he did his schooling at Sainik School Satara and was trained at the National Defence Academy and the Indian Military Academy.
He has served in Leh, Kargil, Kashmir Valley, Poonch Rajauri, deserts and North East in operational scenario.
He was critically injured while commanding his battalion during Op Vijay on Line of Control in Rajouri Sector and was awarded wound medal.
He was awarded Sena Medal (gallantry) in Dras sector, Sena Medal distinguished service in Naoshera, Vishisht Seva Medal in Akhnoor sector, Uttam Yudh Sewa medal in Nagrota, Ati Vishisht Seva Medal in South Kashmir and Param Vishisht Seva Medal as Master General of the Ordnance.
He was selected as military observer for UN Mission in Angola and for military course at National Defence University, Washington and Hawaii. He was also selected for National Defence College, Dhaka.
He captured an enemy post in Dras Sector as Captain and as Major, he killed 22 terrorists in Baramulla district of Kashmir.
As General Officer Commanding in South Kashmir, he planned and achieved the elimination of 55 hard core terrorists and neutralised all prominent terrorist leaders and achieved normalcy in the area.
As Brigade Commander in Naoshera, he ensured there was a check on infiltration from across the border.
As a Corps Commander at Nagrota, he planned and executed the famous surgical strikes.
He is the only serving officer to be awarded maximum number of awards, which are a mix of gallantry and devotion to duty in the Indian Army today.
He has the distinction of having received an award at each level of service.
Lt Gen Nimbhorkar is also Colonel of the Punjab Regiment. He is only the second Maharashtrian after Lt Gen Thorat to hold this post.
He also served as General Officer Commanding, Maharashtra, Gujarat and Goa area before taking over the command of 16 Corps in 2015.
Belonging to an armed forces family, his younger brother is in the Air Force and the youngest retired from the Indian Navy. His elder daughter is a doctor in the Indian Navy and son-in-law also an officer in Indian Navy. His younger daughter works in corporate sector in defence and aerospace.
His wife Sheela Nimbhorkar is involved in welfare activities under the Army Wives Welfare Association and chairperson of the AWWA Ecosystem Committee. PTI VT NP
This is unedited, unformatted feed from the Press Trust of India wire
Lt Gen Nimbhorkar gets PVSM, is most decorated serving officer
Mumbai, Jan 25 (PTI) Lieutenant General Rajendra Ramrao Nimbhorkar, Indian Armys Master General of the Ordnance, has been awarded the Param Vishisht Seva Medal for distinguished service, joining the ranks of officers decorated with the most medals for gallantry and distinguished service.
Lt Gen R R Nimbhorkar, presently Master General of the Ordnance (MGO), looking after Armys procurements, has become the only serving officer to get the maximum number of gallantry and distinguished service awards, an official said.
"He has a unique distinction of having received an award at each level of service," the official said.
Hailing from a farming family of Vidarbha region of Maharashtra, he did his schooling at Sainik School Satara and was trained at the National Defence Academy and the Indian Military Academy.
He has served in Leh, Kargil, Kashmir Valley, Poonch Rajauri, deserts and North East in operational scenario.
He was critically injured while commanding his battalion during Op Vijay on Line of Control in Rajouri Sector and was awarded wound medal.
He was awarded Sena Medal (gallantry) in Dras sector, Sena Medal distinguished service in Naoshera, Vishisht Seva Medal in Akhnoor sector, Uttam Yudh Sewa medal in Nagrota, Ati Vishisht Seva Medal in South Kashmir and Param Vishisht Seva Medal as Master General of the Ordnance.
He was selected as military observer for UN Mission in Angola and for military course at National Defence University, Washington and Hawaii. He was also selected for National Defence College, Dhaka.
He captured an enemy post in Dras Sector as Captain and as Major, he killed 22 terrorists in Baramulla district of Kashmir.
As General Officer Commanding in South Kashmir, he planned and achieved the elimination of 55 hard core terrorists and neutralised all prominent terrorist leaders and achieved normalcy in the area.
As Brigade Commander in Naoshera, he ensured there was a check on infiltration from across the border.
As a Corps Commander at Nagrota, he planned and executed the famous surgical strikes.
He is the only serving officer to be awarded maximum number of awards, which are a mix of gallantry and devotion to duty in the Indian Army today.
He has the distinction of having received an award at each level of service.
Lt Gen Nimbhorkar is also Colonel of the Punjab Regiment. He is only the second Maharashtrian after Lt Gen Thorat to hold this post.
He also served as General Officer Commanding, Maharashtra, Gujarat and Goa area before taking over the command of 16 Corps in 2015.
Belonging to an armed forces family, his younger brother is in the Air Force and the youngest retired from the Indian Navy. His elder daughter is a doctor in the Indian Navy and son-in-law also an officer in Indian Navy. His younger daughter works in corporate sector in defence and aerospace.
His wife Sheela Nimbhorkar is involved in welfare activities under the Army Wives Welfare Association and chairperson of the AWWA Ecosystem Committee. PTI VT NP
This is unedited, unformatted feed from the Press Trust of India wire
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
http://news.statetimes.in/whosoever-stepped-out-was-hit-by-terrorists-families-ordeal/
Whosoever stepped out was hit by terrorists: families’ ordeal
JAMMU: Hundreds of families camping inside the Sunjwan Military Station are living in constant fear due to ongoing anti-terror operations for the past two days as their movement has been restricted inside the campus.
Though para-commandos have safely evacuated large number of families from the family quarters, where terrorists were hiding in the close vicinity, rest of the families were putting up inside their own houses and flats.
STATE TIMES on Sunday interacted with two families on telephone. Each one narrated their own ordeal inside the campus and claimed all the family members are extremely tense and feeling scared in their own houses.
“More than us, our little children are feeling scared. They are not moving out of their rooms as they are scared of terrorists moving in the area,” wife of a serving junior officer told this correspondent on telephone.
Recollecting sequence of events, which unfolded Saturday morning, wife of a junior army officer said, on Saturday morning when a group of heavily armed terrorists sneaked inside the Military Station, they first went up to the family quarter of JCO Madan Lal Choudhary and knocked his door. She said the terrorists had possibly sneaked inside the Military Station from the rear portion as the area was not fully fortified. “Holding torch in his hands when Madan Lal stepped out, one of the terrorists opened fire on him. He was killed on the spot”.
Neha, 20 years old daughter of Madan Lal Choudhary, too received a bullet injury as she tried to shut the door.
Bleeding profusely Madan Lal and his family members tried to raise an alarm but failed to attract attention due to random firing by the terrorists. Madan Lal was evacuated by the para-commandos at around 9.30 AM but by that time it was too late as he had succumbed to his fatal injuries.
Another house lady, staying closer to the family quarters, revealed that large number of injuries to women and children has been due to their swift response to the firing incident outside their homes.
“Whosoever stepped out to see what was happening outside was fired upon by terrorists”. Some other occupants of the flats took risk and jumped from the windows to escape from the scene of action.
By the time Quick Reaction Teams arrived on- the-spot, the terrorists took shelter inside a building where one by one they were neutralised by the elite commandos of the Indian army.
Wife of a junior officer, whose identity has been withheld, claimed, “We are feeling little relaxed today as we know at least three terrorists have been neutralised”. The family members claimed no one inside is sure about the exact number of terrorists, who had managed to sneak inside the Military Station from the ‘rear portion’ of the sprawling campus.
Whosoever stepped out was hit by terrorists: families’ ordeal
JAMMU: Hundreds of families camping inside the Sunjwan Military Station are living in constant fear due to ongoing anti-terror operations for the past two days as their movement has been restricted inside the campus.
Though para-commandos have safely evacuated large number of families from the family quarters, where terrorists were hiding in the close vicinity, rest of the families were putting up inside their own houses and flats.
STATE TIMES on Sunday interacted with two families on telephone. Each one narrated their own ordeal inside the campus and claimed all the family members are extremely tense and feeling scared in their own houses.
“More than us, our little children are feeling scared. They are not moving out of their rooms as they are scared of terrorists moving in the area,” wife of a serving junior officer told this correspondent on telephone.
Recollecting sequence of events, which unfolded Saturday morning, wife of a junior army officer said, on Saturday morning when a group of heavily armed terrorists sneaked inside the Military Station, they first went up to the family quarter of JCO Madan Lal Choudhary and knocked his door. She said the terrorists had possibly sneaked inside the Military Station from the rear portion as the area was not fully fortified. “Holding torch in his hands when Madan Lal stepped out, one of the terrorists opened fire on him. He was killed on the spot”.
Neha, 20 years old daughter of Madan Lal Choudhary, too received a bullet injury as she tried to shut the door.
Bleeding profusely Madan Lal and his family members tried to raise an alarm but failed to attract attention due to random firing by the terrorists. Madan Lal was evacuated by the para-commandos at around 9.30 AM but by that time it was too late as he had succumbed to his fatal injuries.
Another house lady, staying closer to the family quarters, revealed that large number of injuries to women and children has been due to their swift response to the firing incident outside their homes.
“Whosoever stepped out to see what was happening outside was fired upon by terrorists”. Some other occupants of the flats took risk and jumped from the windows to escape from the scene of action.
By the time Quick Reaction Teams arrived on- the-spot, the terrorists took shelter inside a building where one by one they were neutralised by the elite commandos of the Indian army.
Wife of a junior officer, whose identity has been withheld, claimed, “We are feeling little relaxed today as we know at least three terrorists have been neutralised”. The family members claimed no one inside is sure about the exact number of terrorists, who had managed to sneak inside the Military Station from the ‘rear portion’ of the sprawling campus.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
https://www.thestatesman.com/india/...r-bjp-leaders-blame-rohingyas-1502583045.html
Sunjuwan attack: J-K Speaker, BJP leaders blame Rohingyas
Police personnel stand guard as a group of four-to-five heavily armed militants, who stormed an army camp in Jammu on Feb. 10, 2018. (Photo: IANS)
Jammu-Kashmir Assembly Speaker Kavinder Gupta stirred a hornet’s nest on Saturday, 10 February, by alleging that Rohingyas had a hand in the terror attack on an army camp in Sunjuwan.
Speaking in the J-K Assembly, Gupta said that the attack took place “because of the presence of the Rohingya refugees in the area”.
His comment sparked a row in the assembly with many leaders storming into the well of the assembly demanding an apology from the Speaker for targeting a particular community. The Speaker later expunged his remark.
But some BJP leaders in the state reiterated the allegation that the illegal immigrants, who came from Myanmar following persecution, might have had a hand in the attack.
MLC Vikram Randhawa demanded an investigation into the “illegal” settlements of Rohingyas in Jammu.
Meanwhile, BJP leader Ravinder Raina accused Pakistan of creating trouble in the state.
“The cowards [Pakistani terrorists] again attacked a camp but our brave jawans will neutralise the terrorists,” he said.
The camp houses a brigade of the Indian Army. Reports say that there are Rohingya settlements around the camp.
Around 4-5 heavily armed terrorists attacked Sunjuwan Military Station of the Indian Army located along National Highway 44 in Jammu from the rear side. They hurled grenades and used heavy volume of automatic gunfire, which left seven army personnel and the daughter of an armyman injured. Two of the injured army personnel succumbed to their injuries.
Para commandos have been flown in from Udhampur to neutralise the terrorists who are still holed up inside the camp.
There were intelligence inputs that Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM) militants were planning to carry out an attack around the 5th death anniversary of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru, who was hanged on 9 February 2013 in Tihar Jail, informed sources in the police said.
Militants had attacked the same camp in 2006. Twelve soldiers were killed and seven others were injured then before the two ‘fidayeen’ (suicide) terrorists were neutralised.
Sunjuwan attack: J-K Speaker, BJP leaders blame Rohingyas
Police personnel stand guard as a group of four-to-five heavily armed militants, who stormed an army camp in Jammu on Feb. 10, 2018. (Photo: IANS)
Jammu-Kashmir Assembly Speaker Kavinder Gupta stirred a hornet’s nest on Saturday, 10 February, by alleging that Rohingyas had a hand in the terror attack on an army camp in Sunjuwan.
Speaking in the J-K Assembly, Gupta said that the attack took place “because of the presence of the Rohingya refugees in the area”.
His comment sparked a row in the assembly with many leaders storming into the well of the assembly demanding an apology from the Speaker for targeting a particular community. The Speaker later expunged his remark.
But some BJP leaders in the state reiterated the allegation that the illegal immigrants, who came from Myanmar following persecution, might have had a hand in the attack.
MLC Vikram Randhawa demanded an investigation into the “illegal” settlements of Rohingyas in Jammu.
Meanwhile, BJP leader Ravinder Raina accused Pakistan of creating trouble in the state.
“The cowards [Pakistani terrorists] again attacked a camp but our brave jawans will neutralise the terrorists,” he said.
The camp houses a brigade of the Indian Army. Reports say that there are Rohingya settlements around the camp.
Around 4-5 heavily armed terrorists attacked Sunjuwan Military Station of the Indian Army located along National Highway 44 in Jammu from the rear side. They hurled grenades and used heavy volume of automatic gunfire, which left seven army personnel and the daughter of an armyman injured. Two of the injured army personnel succumbed to their injuries.
Para commandos have been flown in from Udhampur to neutralise the terrorists who are still holed up inside the camp.
There were intelligence inputs that Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM) militants were planning to carry out an attack around the 5th death anniversary of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru, who was hanged on 9 February 2013 in Tihar Jail, informed sources in the police said.
Militants had attacked the same camp in 2006. Twelve soldiers were killed and seven others were injured then before the two ‘fidayeen’ (suicide) terrorists were neutralised.
12arya
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2017
- Messages
- 4,208
- Likes
- 15,083
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...m_medium=Organic&utm_campaign=Related_Stories
Eye on strategic Chabahar port, Sushma makes stopover at Iran
Highlights
NEW DELHI: External affairs minister Sushma Swaraj on Saturday made an unannounced stopover at Tehran on her way back from Russia and held a luncheon meeting with her Iranian counterpart Javed Zarif, a day before inauguration of the strategically-important Chabahar port.
Swaraj was returning from the Russian city of Sochi where she attended the annual summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)+ .
The external affairs ministry said Swaraj and Zarif discussed various aspects of India-Iran relations and ways to strengthen these during the meeting, besides exchanging views on regional and global developments of mutual interest.
The meeting came a day before the inauguration of the Chabahar port in Iran+ by the country's President Hassan Rouhani. The port will operationalise a new strategic transit route among India, Afghanistan and Iran, bypassing Pakistan.
"Both sides positively reviewed the initiatives undertaken since the visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Iran in May 2016 including cooperation in Chabahar Port which will be inaugurated by the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran Hassan Rouhani tomorrow at presence of ministers from India, Afghanistan and the region," said the ministry.
The two ministers are understood to have reviewed the implementation of the Chabahar port project in which India is a key partner.
Over a month ago, India had sent its first consignment of wheat to Afghanistan by sea through the Chabahar port in Iran.
The port is likely to ramp up trade among India, Afghanistan and Iran in the wake of Pakistan denying transit access to New Delhi for trade with the two countries.
Besides bilateral issues, Swaraj and Zarif are understood to have deliberated on political developments in the Gulf region.
Recommended By Colombia
"Both ministers also exchanged views on regional and global developments of mutual interest," the external affairs ministry said.
India is looking to increase engagement with Iran by raising oil imports and possible shipments of natural gas and the issue is believed to have figured in the meeting.
Swaraj had paid a bilateral visit to Iran in April last year during which both sides had decided to significantly expand engagement in their overall ties, particularly in boosting Indian investment in joint ventures in oil and gas sectors.
MEA officials said it was a technical stopover and not an unscheduled one.
Eye on strategic Chabahar port, Sushma makes stopover at Iran
Highlights
- The meeting came a day before the inauguration of the Chabahar port in Iran.
- The port will operationalise a new strategic transit route among India, Afghanistan and Iran, bypassing Pakistan.
- The port is likely to ramp up trade among India, Afghanistan and Iran.
NEW DELHI: External affairs minister Sushma Swaraj on Saturday made an unannounced stopover at Tehran on her way back from Russia and held a luncheon meeting with her Iranian counterpart Javed Zarif, a day before inauguration of the strategically-important Chabahar port.
Swaraj was returning from the Russian city of Sochi where she attended the annual summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)+ .
The external affairs ministry said Swaraj and Zarif discussed various aspects of India-Iran relations and ways to strengthen these during the meeting, besides exchanging views on regional and global developments of mutual interest.
The meeting came a day before the inauguration of the Chabahar port in Iran+ by the country's President Hassan Rouhani. The port will operationalise a new strategic transit route among India, Afghanistan and Iran, bypassing Pakistan.
"Both sides positively reviewed the initiatives undertaken since the visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Iran in May 2016 including cooperation in Chabahar Port which will be inaugurated by the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran Hassan Rouhani tomorrow at presence of ministers from India, Afghanistan and the region," said the ministry.
The two ministers are understood to have reviewed the implementation of the Chabahar port project in which India is a key partner.
Over a month ago, India had sent its first consignment of wheat to Afghanistan by sea through the Chabahar port in Iran.
The port is likely to ramp up trade among India, Afghanistan and Iran in the wake of Pakistan denying transit access to New Delhi for trade with the two countries.
Besides bilateral issues, Swaraj and Zarif are understood to have deliberated on political developments in the Gulf region.
Recommended By Colombia
"Both ministers also exchanged views on regional and global developments of mutual interest," the external affairs ministry said.
India is looking to increase engagement with Iran by raising oil imports and possible shipments of natural gas and the issue is believed to have figured in the meeting.
Swaraj had paid a bilateral visit to Iran in April last year during which both sides had decided to significantly expand engagement in their overall ties, particularly in boosting Indian investment in joint ventures in oil and gas sectors.
MEA officials said it was a technical stopover and not an unscheduled one.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2014
- Messages
- 32,663
- Likes
- 151,106
Sirji!!!
Keep a lookout for wheeled APC for UN missions, tender was issued almost 6 months back by MoD.
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2015
- Messages
- 1,419
- Likes
- 2,819
Wheeled APC?!?!?!?
Kestrel?????
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2014
- Messages
- 32,663
- Likes
- 151,106
No Info as of now....
Tender was for 10 vehicles, if I remember correctly.
Let’s see which one gets picked...
Indian Sniper.001
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2016
- Messages
- 1,454
- Likes
- 6,737
This is actually good. Small changes too are important as much as the big changes, it helps go a long way.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P | DRDO Annual Report 2014-15 indian Army related news | Indian Army | 0 | |
|
Making of an Indian Army Soldier- Army Regiment News | Indian Army | 0 | |
| E | The Indian Army and paranormal activities, UFO and the Yeti! | Indian Army | 5 | |
| W | Indian army should buy Galil ACE 7. 62 x 51 mm assault rifle | Indian Army | 4 |
