1. This article has been triggered by a response by 'A Scholarly Crtique' dt 20 Oct 2024 of my article titled ' Our Military Thinking and Reading Habits ' published by MVI on 19 Oct 2024 . The PDF / Links of both are given below for your reference:
2. I read with respect what all that these illustrious commentators say. They are, unlike me, highly educated persons with very wide readership and possibly teaching experience. However, I must take the issue with the one single point that all of them keep raising and putting it in different words, but mean the very same thing. That is holistic education, exposure to international matters, to manage and fight the complex wars of tomorrow. They want the military officer to be fully conversant with the complex international intercourse, the nature of that intercourse and its rapid transformations and alterations. If the fauji officer does not study such matters, it is stressed, then he will not be able to fight and win the wars that will come his way. All these commentators are from the West, and our Desi experts also repeat that line of thinking. Alright, let's look back over the last 30 odd years and even further back, because the Western officers have been taught all these subjects that the commentators suggest. Then what did these officers from Western academies and war colleges do during their wars?
3. The Vietnam war really took off in 1968 with about 500,000 US troops and ended in 1975. By then, US military academies were teaching international subjects to their cadets, thus the officers who served in Vietnam and those who staffed the Pentagon, were well exposed to all the subjects that these commentators refer to. How did this education help them to fight against the Vietcong? How did all that they learnt about non-military matters help the military officers in Pentagon to do what they did in Vietnam? If they were educated in the late 50s and 60s to fight the complex wars of the 70s and beyond, how come they failed in Vietnam? Who listened to these holistically trained officers ? Surely many must have concluded, and correctly, that Vietnam was a vortex and will end in failure. Observe that the USA military after studying so many varied subjects, including Human Relations and Man Management, could not even convince their own public that Vietnam was a good thing? After the defeat in Vietnam, what changes were made in the teaching syllabus at USA training academies to make them even better prepared for the wars that America would fight over the next 50 yrs up to 2025? Because see what happened.
4. From 1975 to 1990, for 15 years, USA had no big war to fight, and then Iraq invaded Kuwait and USA sent up to 960,000 troops into Iraq and we do not count the officers on ships, aircraft, logistic formations, all trained holistically to fight the forthcoming complex wars. What inputs did the Govt of USA take from all these holistically trained officers? Were they asked to give their views and deductions on what the outcome would be? Did any civilian official bother to have deep and open consultations with these well trained officers on how to wage this war? Impossible. Bush Sr and his administration did what they wanted to do, with full support from the military-industrial power and went into Kuwait and pushed Iraq out. But that war was an utter failure, Saddam still ruled Iraq. Surely some military officers must have suggested that the dictator must be eliminated once and for all? The holistically educated officer could see the danger and uselessness of letting Saddam continue. Did any civilian listen to him? The military officers know the horrors of war, the gore, the blood, the death, the pain to families, the emptiness that comes with body bags. The educationists, commentators, strategists who taught the military officer subjects that will supposedly help him in war, never suffer the agonies of battle. You trained the officer to become a part of the system to evaluate, assess and measure the holistic impact of war, but his opinion was not even sought. What did you achieve by teaching all that rubbish when you don't want to seek his opinion about that rubbish? Did White House of Bush Sr ask any military officer how this war must be concluded and brought to an end? The officer had been educated to think this through was he not? Any self respecting military man who had studied all those non-military subjects, would have said remove the root of the cause, and then come home. So it was not the US Army that allowed Saddam remain, it was the Pentagon and Deptt of State along with White House who did that. What did they achieve? They never asked that hoilistically educated soldier what should we do? What a waste of top quality education.
5. The UK was also introducing similar subjects to keep their Imperial ambitions alive. British cadets came out of Dartmouth, Sandhurst, Cranwell as holistically empowered officers and led their forces to the dismantling of the empire and their best achievements were the very well executed strategic retreats from their colonies. I do not mock the British Armed Forces, I laud them for executing the most difficult of all military manoeuvres, the Retreat. Is that why you taught them diplomacy, finance, sociology, political science, humanities at the academies? All for brilliant retreats? My felicitations to my British brother officers, for succeeding even though those subjects had nothing to do with their performance. Who in Whitehall consulted the staff of the CIGS for the dismantling of the British colonies? The officers had been educated on those very disciplines were they not? If you do not wish to take the opinions of military officers on non-military subjects, why do you burden them with studying those subjects in their academies? I ask all these commentators to ask this of the Govts of UK & USA. And then the absolute final mighty fall, Falklands. During my personal interaction with RAF and British Army officers at DSSC around 2006, and they both commented that Falklands was an absolute 'Cock Up'. Did anyone in Whitehall and 10 Downing Street seek the views and assessments of the British military establishment about Falklands / Malvinas, before committing them to war?
6. Then we come to the 21st century when holistic and all round education had been given to generations of military officers in the West. They are now fully familiar and conversant with the complex international intercourse. How many military officers in UK, USA, Europe were consulted and were a part of the deliberations before the invasion of Iraq in 2003? It was the military officer and his troops who would die, get maimed, blinded, crippled and need support at home on their return. Their lives would be devastated and their families shattered. That WMDs did not exist in Iraq was not a secret, and the well educated military officers knew it just as well as the civilians in State Deptt, CIA, Pentagon, Min of Defence UK; and in every university and Think Tanks across USA & UK. We in India knew it even better having had our training teams in Iraq till late 80s. Yet an ex 5 Star general of USA lied to the world sitting in the United Nations holding an audio cassette as proof of WMDs in Iraq. Everyone who reads this will recall that scene in the UNGA. Which military officers were asked their opinions about what to do? If the civilians are not going to seek opinions from holistically educated military officers, why are you torturing them with holistic subjects? You prepare the Cadet to become a part of the complex system, but never use the knowledge he has been given, not even by mistake. Who is fooling whom? Can these commentators / educationists / strategic thinkers / opinion makers ask this question to those who do not want a military officer's opinion on non-military matters. Why are you giving him this education? Lets not forget to ask how many holistically educated military officers agreed to the Afghan misadventure? Were they even asked? All of them, from top to bottom were trained and educated in all those international subjects. You created them to manage the complex wars of the future, but never took their valuable insights on whether to go or not to go into the quagmire called Afghanistan. Any military man would have said No, esp after having seen what happened to the Russians, yet USA went in and came back defeated. It was not the US Armed Forces who were defeated in Afghanistan, it was the civilian powers who ignored the wisdom residing in the military officers, they are responsible for the Afghan debacle. Possibly, if the military officers had been educated in pure simple military subjects, they would have questioned the assessments and deductions of the civilian boffins, and possibly, the American tragedy of Afghanistan would never have happened. Possibly.
7. The same situation obtains in India. The Cabinet Committee on Security does not have military officers. The Cabinet Committee on Finance has no military officers. There are many such top level committees and bodies that never have had and never will have, military officers. The Defence Secretary, a pure babu, is responsible for the defence of India, not the CDS and the three Chiefs. It has been so since 1950. Sadly not one Prime Minister has dared to change this shameful incongruity, not even this one; and include the Indian military as a part of the system that will defend India. And in this crooked unbalanced environment these commentators want to teach military officers subjects like diplomacy, finance, international relations and equations? Military officers should learn in some depth the importance of groupings like QUAD, BRICS, G-20, G-7, SCO, Indo-Africa Grouping, Indo-Middle East equations, and so on? For what? Indian Faujis are unimportant and considered flippant on these matters, what after all can a Fauji general know about these complicated matters? The civilian powers say, teach the Faujis all these allied subjects, but Fauji opinions still mean nothing to us.
8. In conclusion I again say, most certainly include such non military subjects to inform these Fauji cadets, junior / middle level officers about what is happening outside the barbed wire fencing, or across the seas. More important is to teach him technology that will enable him to fight smarter and safer. Teach him about new innovative weapons and equipment that makes the lives of soldiers safer and secure and gives him a bigger bang for the same Rupee. Such subjects will indeed make him a better leader in war and peace; with greater confidence and self assurance, which will filter down to the men he commands. That is what we want from these officers, till they start getting stars on their flags. Then possibly some more international scenarios can be looked at. But keep in mind our officers, all the way up to Maj Gens are going to be deeply and intimately involved in the happenings on our borders with China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Myanmar, Tibet, Afghanistan They will be very closely associated with Lanka and Maldives. This scenario is not going to change in the foreseeable future. Do not create situations that cannot happen. They will never wage war away for the immdiate neighbourhood.
9. The Western world wants to be the International Policeman, and for them the international or even universal canvas is important. But as we have witnessed, no one bothers to ask this western Military man his opinion. For us in India it is not so. We are not even a regional policeman, and do not wish to be one, and what's more, we cannot become one. We know what our officers and jawans are going to do in the years ahead, let's stop at 2047 for the time being. Subjects that in the eyes of Western thinkers are necessary for their military, are not pertinent to India today. We have our own snakes, jackals, vultures, hyenas, charlatans, enemies to tackle. They are different from what obtains in the West. The West, including their educationists who have commented, cannot even begin to comprehend our complexity and neighbourhood. Even our home grown experts have been unable to identify the intricate complications that India lives in. That the Indian military will not resolve the non military problems by studying them in their war colleges is elementary truth. That job belongs to other Govt services, do it, and do it well. Our job is to do other things, let us do them, and let us do them well. Do not keep harping on the complexity of future wars that have universal and global ramifications. Our future wars are right here along our land, sea and air borders. We need to take care of them, help us to do that. Do not divert our attention towards what does not matter to India, if that happens, we will lose the battle and the advantage at home. That is unacceptable to us Faujis.
Comments