Editor's Note
An article titled ' Regulating the Self Appointed Defence Experts ' by Col Shivaji Ranjan Ghosh was Published by MVI on 24 Aug 2024. To read open link below after note.
Since the subject by itself has been a talking point amongst viewers ,especially the defence veterans, this article was well received and triggered an interesting debate .The responses received show that many veterans are very critical of some of the defence veterans who have been poorly representing the defence services as self styled or nominated experts on various subjects of debate and discussion on which they are inexperienced or unqualified to comment.Many veterans felt an imperative need to regulate , control or check these veterans and prevent a poor or wrong impression about the military from being projected by them on the electronic media / TV channels .
All the responses published below will give the readers a very broad perspective of what the veterans perceive and recommend .The debate is being published for posterity and to educate and well inform the readers / viewers of such debates .We hope that concerned military authorities take some action to regulate ,control or check these defence experts from projecting a poor or wrong impression about our armed forces .
Note- Images / photos inside the article are for representational purpose only.
Col Vinay B Dalvi,
Editor ,MVI
Trigger For Debate
Gp Capt TP Srivastava
Self-appointed defence "experts" must post their background in the public domain before opening their mouth and present themselves in print or visual media.
Having worn the uniform and having the gift of gab is no qualification to become an expert!
They must place in public domain their original thoughts translated into words. Most of the current defence "experts" have never written an original article on international affairs, Geo-Strategic scenario, weapons, technology, etc.
Most manage to waffle their way through sensationalised issues !
No other country has such practice !
But our ignorant media also wants to hear the crap and not facts !
Most in their professional lives may have never been part of conducting and authoring a major exercise. And what takes the cake is their abysmally low info on sister services.
But their gift of gab keeps them in the stream.
Responses
Col Vijay Bhate
Well said, Gp Capt Srivastava .
It is these TV channels who dig out a number of experts.
I remember on one channel some time back Gen Shekatkar was making a point on a subject and one Brig was trying to be clever by half facts / truth on something on which the Gen had to really give him a polite shut up call !
That is the state all over. It is creating a rather poor image/ impression in general about us veterans in particular and also the armed forces in general .
Brig Pradeep Sharma
Very appropriate in these times.
Most of the guys project a poor image on TV.
Personal views are that no one other than the PRO or a Rep from ADGPI should speak on TV. One needs to watch BBC and CNN coverage of incidents and battles and learn.
In addition, my opinion on the calibre of most speakers on TV is that they are poor orators and don't project a good image.
Most of them also merely toe the official political line for reasons best known to them.
Brig Neil John
Who are we to judge, and why are we so negative about everything?
We military men are our worst enemies.
Let everyone do what he wants to do.
They have retired now.
You are no longer bound by rules and restrictions.
You have a few years left, live how you want, say what you want, look like what you wan, and most of all go where you want. Only remember not to let down your brothers by demeaning the uniform or give confidential information out.
Tomorrow if a JCO or OR speaks you will be worse off in the commenting.
I personally feel everyone is an expert in something or the other. Some write it well, some articulate it well and some do both excellently.
Enjoy the TV sho. After all, how long does the effect of that show even last? Forgotten in minutes. If you don’t like the dress he is wearing, don’t watch, simple.
Funny caps, grotesque amount of medals, unwieldily moustaches, and a loud voice are part of the show.
The veteran is happy. He shows off his tele presence and earns brownie points with his close ones.
Frankly, life is too short to be a judge. There are more real issues we face in the military. The biggest is the loss of serving leadership values. We can’t even address 5% of that, and we aim to tame veterans ?
Col PK Royal Mehrishi
Even the gift of gab is doubtful too, most have :
1. High decibel levels to prove their point.
2. Make basic grammatical mistakes while speaking.
3. Put on a weird accent ( some have pronounced Haryanvi & Punjabi accent )
4. Lose their temper, go red in the face, and wag their fingers at fellow panelists.
5. Cut a sorry figure with side caps, jackets decked up as Christmas trees, faded & unpolished Regimental souvenirs in the background (when up linked from their homes)
Brig Rajiv Williams
I read the short note by Col Shivaji Ranjan Ghosh and an article by Lt Gen BPS Mander, on the topic being discussed and found much similarity in the thinking of both the authors on the supposed Defence analysts, Defence experts and Defence observers.
While many a thought has been shared on this platform, but to me the most relevant and appropriate one is by Brig Neil – just leave it to these TV presenters and within our own community we can laugh, debate or just send a personal message to the expert, if we know him and either compliment him or critique him.
Why carry on a debate on a non-issue – Non issue, coz we can do little on individual choices and their behaviours. Some come off well, and some are just worth being shamed. However, we must also give them credits for having been invited by the TV channels. I do not subscribe to the fact that in case a Gen officer is rebutted by a Col during a debate and has substantive knowledge on the subject, has done injustice to his doffed uniform. They both are retired and while some may have ground experience, which is much more important than someone who sits miles away from the combat zone and prefers to make an aerial operational visit from a height to 15,000 to 20,000 feet.
Let the presenters be accountable and have the gumption to talk with confidence and facts to support them. Most of these TV experts, barring a very few, just toe the line of the powers that be and they sure are clubbed under the laughing stock club.
I would think for the presenters to become more savvy and refined in their delivery, a short offline / online course by Institute of Mass Communication / ADGPI / or the like could be structured and promoted by media houses themselves and even making it mandatory for the new lot of veterans invited.
Brig Neil John
A mature and logical approach, sir!
Col NP Sharma
A very workable solution to a non-issue.
Col Shivaji Ranjan Ghosh
Whether something is an issue or a non-issue, depends on your perception.
A RELEVANT ARTICLE THAT COMPLEMENTS THE DEBATE
OF DEFENCE ANALYSTS AND DEFENCE EXPERTS
By LT Gen BPS Mander
(This article is just in jest. If you are a cynic, do not read further)
These days it is fashionable to become a ‘Defence Analyst’, and if you cannot be one, then at least you can become a ‘Defence Expert’. In foreign armies ‘defence analysts’ are appointed; and they work with the government or the military to examine, evaluate, and review
information, and write reports with recommendations.
No such thing here. Some exposure in the IDSA can make you an 'analyst’. Be that as it may; anyone can become an ‘expert’. All that is required is that he should have retired. And should you have served in the Valley, even as an Adm Comdt, your credentials take a big leap. You are the authority on all issues in the Valley irrespective of your
level of expertise.
When the trend began, a lot of officers became experts without any expertise. And in keeping with the established principles of seniority, the level of intelligence got related to the rank, the higher the rank the higher was considered to be your level of expertise. Dramatically some ‘Colonels’ inserted themselves with a patent on ‘command experience’ and so the net result today is that you have Colonels and Generals on TV, with only ‘Brigadier’ Mahalingam as
the link between the two.
When the trend of these specialists caught up, a lot of people wanted to join the bandwagon; but soon the positions were saturated as TV
channels could only accommodate X number of people. So those who did not make it as ‘experts’ harboured a grudge against those who did.
Since I had done a study on the issue, some approached me for consultations. I gave them my view on what is the best way to get into this field. If they wanted to enter this field they would need to follow some guidelines. These would need to be practiced before the
mirror if they were to make an impression on TV. I advised them on a three point formula:-
First, practice putting up a glum and serious face. After all war and insurgency is serious business.
Second, grow a handlebar moustache, and if not possible, at least a sizable one, which endorses your dominance over the clean shaven civilians.
Third and last and the most important, unless you have some catch phrases in your vocabulary, you stand no chances of making it for more than one time on TV, unless you know someone on the Channel. You can represent, but can never be an ‘expert’. It is time to forget the weapon that you carried in service. Your new weapon is the ‘catch phraseology’, the flavour of the day. Be clear on what you have to say. You should speak of ‘an intended legitimate military target’ with 'minimal collateral damage’, as against ‘carpet bombing’ which damages the ‘local psyche’. Operations must create ‘shock and awe’ and yet not 'rattle’. Army is a ‘broad sword’ and not a ‘scalpel’, but yet the Indian Army used the ‘scalpel’ to carry out strikes with ‘surgical precision’.
This much would be enough to establish your position on TV, but should you wish to hold on to it, you need to do more. You cannot say that ‘the enemy was caught napping’, it has to be
‘enemy was caught in a stupor’. And no proof can be given of our
‘surgical strikes’ as ‘National interest’ and ‘National security’ are 'non negotiable’. After all the matter has been discussed it the ‘Cabinet Committee on Security’ and decided that ‘graphic accounts’ of 'routine operations’ are never given out.
And all this will be of no use if you are not seized with how cross border terrorist camps and ‘launch pads’ are organized and the ability to counter ‘unprovoked and naked aggression’ and the ‘existential phenomenon’ of ‘cross border fire’.
Since arguing on Pakistan is a fashion these days, you have to be armed with some specific phrases.. Forget about ‘guerrilla warfare’, 'insurgency’ and ‘terrorism’, the catchphrase is ‘asymmetric warfare’,
a war ‘between belligerents whose relative military power differs significantly’ to ‘offset deficiencies in quality and quantity’.
Please remember that “Osama Bin Laden’ is no more in fashion and unless you mention ‘Masood Azhar’, ‘Hafeez Sayyed’, and ‘Sayeed Salauddin’ , you are shooting in the dark. And if you can throw in ‘Burhan Wani’, you will be considered topical
And if you want to be called repeatedly, you have to obliquely throw in the ‘ Haqqani Network’, since it is popular with US as it irks them. And to be super savvy, throw in names of some ‘non state actors’ like ‘Jalaluddin and Sarajuddin Haqqani’, and their relationship with each other.
A young officer, who had done ten years in the Army before being released, asked me if he could become a defence expert. I told him that by all means he could. So I gave him the catch phrases and told him to go ahead and make his mark. Incidentally he already had a handlebar moustache.
Armed with this knowledge he approached a Channel, confident that with the all the phraseology under his belt there was no stopping him. The first question they asked him was his
rank, and when he said Major, they told him it is a no go. He shot back that Sir Basil Liddell Hart was just a Captain and he taught generals. But they were not impressed. They asked him if he was from the Infantry, and when he said no, he had already lost the race. He gave them examples that Napoleon was a gunner and Mc Arthur was an Engineer and so on. But of no avail.
So frustrated he came back and told me that he had not made it as he was not from the elite Infantry, so consoled him that he need not worry as there were other options. So I told him that he should become a ‘defence observer.’ And what does a defence observer do, he asked. Nothing, he just observes and enjoys the tons of wisdom doled out on TV, something we missed in service.
So a word of advice to those who could not make it, just become defence observers and you will enjoy the unending sermons and will also be able to assess that some who could not find their feet in service, have now established themselves as ‘experts’.
Brig Pradeep Sharma
What we do is precisely that !
Laugh at them and change the channel !
But for a few erudite and well read Veterans ,I have often wondered why and how a channel picks the speaker?
Influence or Network ?
Or the free contribution combined with the joy of being on TV ?
The Debate Continues...
Lt Gen Harbhajan Singh:
SERVICE OFFICERS ON TV
After the General Elections, the topic of 'Agniveers' was raised in the Parliament.
A channel rang up an officer and invited him to come for the program.
Side by side the TV
Person asked the officer, "Are you for
or against the Scheme"!
In this case the officer said "Against"!
In that case, we regret and withdraw the invitation, the TV person said!
(As told to me -HS )
Maj Gen Rajan Kochhar
Defence Experts on Media
At the outset, I was in two minds whether to comment or otherwise.
However, I decided to pen down my views as I have been invited to numerous TV channels since about four years now as a 'Defence Expert' on varied topics stretching from geopolitics, defence modernisation, terrorism, foreign affairs.
I have also given numerous interviews on U tube channels on Corporatisation of OFB, NOK issue, Security concerns in sub-continent, Indo-Pak-China relations etc.
My claim to fame is nothing so great except I am a regular contributor to articles on all these subjects on Economic Times, Chanakya Forum, DRaS and some other web related media. I have also written a book titled *'Breaking the Chinese Myth', which has gone into third reprint and is available on Amazon.
Now, to talk about criteria on being invited by these TV channels. Let me tell you that some serious TV channels like India Today, Wion, NDTV, News X, to name a few, are very careful about whom they invite which they do after due assessment of the credentials of the veteran. Balance of the mainstream media has absolutely no criteria except the person must follow their line of thought and be a good orator. These channels have no clue about the organisation structure of the armed forces as they consider all arms and services to be the same. For them, it doesn’t matter if it is Infantry, AC, Artillery or ASC. I have seen AMC doctors who commented on strategy and military tactics. Also, many of these have never been exposed to either a command of a unit or any key operational or logistical appointment in an active formation HQ.
I would further add that *'One bad fish spoils the pond' , is very much applicable here as we do have a few of these who tarnish the image of the forces through their unbecoming conduct, using foul language, shallow knowledge and political overtones.
Therefore, I tend to agree that there needs to be some regulation on how the organisation should frame guidelines for selection of veterans as Defence Experts.
Indian Navy has commenced a course for Veterans to train them as such. I believe this course is well conducted and well subscribed.
Till this happens present state of affairs will continue . As someone said, "You have the remote in your hand,select what you want to see and ignore the others."
Incidentally, I am honoured to see my photo amongst others in the article written .
Gp Capt TP Srivastava: Ref Gen Hs Response:
It's absolutely correct ! Most rather, all channels have a pre conceived agenda.
I have faced it personally, hence decline to join any "fish market" level debates. In fact, most anchors take over the script if the "expert" is straying off course.
Gp Capt Johnson Chacko
Every media, print, TV, or whatever, have editorial directors, appointed by the owners.
Owners decide the direction, editorial directors need to follow.
Journalists and Anchors need to follow it.
That is why they are paid media.
Ambani and Adani own media channels.
Exit polls were way off the mark.
Will those pollsters ever be believed in the future? Public memory is short. They will again be paid to do exit polls after next elections!
The common man is fooled.
Col NN Bhatia
Apart from most of these defence analysts and " experts” on TV channels,
it is also significant that only “experts” who espouse and speak in favour of the Govt are being broadcast to viewers.
This is apparent and is a government ploy using media to manipulate public opinion.
Furthermore, the “experts” are singularly silent and /or ignorant as to the actual nature of the problems on the ground which is putting our soldiers and officers at a disadvantage in the face of the enemy.
All the retired military “experts” singular silence on the overwhelming dominance of the NSA and his policmen cohorts on defence matters and military operations is even more deafening.
It is like pre-1962 days, where for its own reasons the present political and bureaucratic establishment is running and interfering in matters of the military without accountability.
コメント