Defence Notes

New Delhi, 27 August 2007

Operation Leech

DEFENCE MINISTRY EMBARRASSED

By Syed Ali Mujtaba

According to the Defence Ministry, during a joint military exercise codenamed “Operation Leech”, the Indian security forces comprising the Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guards, nabbed an “international gang of gun smugglers," allegedly supplying weapons to the Indian insurgent groups in the North-east who were waging a war against the country. The Ministry also claimed that a huge cache of arms and ammunition were seized from the gunrunners and six of them were killed during a fierce encounter.

 However, as the trial progresses it is now becoming clear that the "international gang of gun smugglers" were none other than the Karen National Union (KNU) and the National Unity Party of Arakan (NUPA) rebels who were fighting Myanmar’s military junta and were helped by India with arms and provided a safe sanctuary.

Moreover, according to the KNU and NUPA defendants, the Indian military and intelligence officials had been clandestinely supporting them for years offering them storage facilities for the arms procured from a third country to fight the military rule in Myanmar, even before ‘Operation Leech.’

In their plaint, the rebels have also claimed that they had traveled overnight from southern Thailand, where they had procured arms from unknown dealers, to India's Landfall Island for a scheduled rendezvous with the Indian military and intelligence officials. “The Indian army for some unknown reasons abruptly changed its plan and apprehended us on our arrival at Landfall Island,” the defendants allege.

While 28 members of KNU and NUPA were disarmed, shackled and held in different areas of the island, six NUPA leaders were whisked away to be killed in cold blood, they add. Not only that. The rebels were detained for nine years in legal limbo with no formal charges framed against them. They were even denied councilor access under detention.

However, due to pressure from a human rights group their trial was shifted from a Port Blair court in the Andaman-Nicobar archipelago to the City Sessions Court in Kolkata in December 2004. It was only on the orders of the Supreme Court in October 2006 that charges were framed against them under the Arms Act, the Explosive Substances Act and the Foreigners Act.

True, many of the details as to what transpired on Landfall Islands on 8 February 1998, are yet to become clear but the version of the events as narrated by the rebels seem to be gaining credibility. More so because the CBI was forced to drop one of the initial charges due to lack of evidence. The CBI had accused the rebels of attempting to wage war against India, which could not be substantiated.

A booklet titled “Why Are Burma’s Freedom Fighters Imprisoned in India” released by the Solidarity Committee of the Burmese Struggle for Democracy details the whole situation of the arrest of the rebels and questions the authenticity of the Indian defence establishment’s claim.

The booklet reveals that the rebels, who are members of the Arakan Army, the armed wing of NUPA and KNU, had a close relationship with the Indian defence establishment through an Indian military intelligence officer Colonel V. S “Gary” Grewal, who liaised with them. Grewal, who speaks Burmese fluently, had been in contact with the Arakan Army since 1997. Further, he was the conduit between the rebels and the Indian security forces which had provided the Arakan Army with logistic support.

According to records, the rebels arrived at Landfall Island in Nicobar on 8 February 1998, on an assurance by the Indian military intelligence allowing them to set up a base on the Island. The booklet also states that the Indian military went back on its so-called word as it had never planned to keep its promise and arrested their long-time friends.

Calling the betrayal “Operation Leech”, they killed six of the Arakan Army leaders in cold blood, it adds. It also alleged that Grewal, who had planned and carried out “Operation Leech”, betrayed the rebels, after taking thousands of dollars, at the behest of Myanmar’s military junta.

According to the rebels lawyer Siddharth Agarwal, his clients' defense is simple: "They were called to Landfall Island by the Indian authorities with the promise that they would be armed by the Indian Army in their quest for freedom against the military junta in Myanmar. The State prosecutors have reportedly failed to produce significant pieces of evidence requested by the defense, including the ammunition seized that evening,” asserts Agarwal.

He also complains that the Court allowed three military officials allegedly involved in the sting operation to testify via video link without allowing any cross-examinations by the defense.According to the witnesses’ testimony in the Court, they had never seen the six NUPA leaders and had heard the gunshots sound from a distance. However, the prosecution has denied the claims, insisting that the Indian military's only contact with either of the rebel groups was for the purpose of conducting the sting operation.

Alleges a PUCL lawyer monitoring the case very closely, “If the trial goes on in the right direction, the Indian military's contacts with the Burmese rebels will be revealed ... That's why they killed the six leaders. It was because they knew too much."

The revelations emerging from the ‘Operation Leech’ trial in Kolkata, clearly suggests, New Delhi's alleged link with the rebel groups in Myanmar. The Indian intelligence operatives in the late 1980s and early 1990s spent years cultivating ties with the rebel groups fighting Myanmar's military rule. They made several offers of logistical support to the Arakan and Chin insurgent groups operating in Myanmar's remote western border regions.

Significantly, ‘Operation Leech’ would have remained pretty much out of public view had it not been for the war of words between George Fernandes and former Naval Chief Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat in 1998. It was during this exchange of charges and counter-charges that a note dated 27 July 1998 came to light.

In the final analysis, it remains to be seen what impact the Court proceeding are likely to have on the India-Myanmar relationship once the charges levied against the rebels are formally demolished. ---- INFA

(Copyright India News and Feature Alliance)

Defence Notes

New Delhi, 13 August 2007

Higher Allowances

BUT A LOT MORE NEEDED

By Col. (Retd.) P. K. Vasudeva, Phd.

The Union Government has brought cheer to soldiers keeping vigil in the icy- cold Himalayan heights by enhancing their high-altitude allowance four-fold and giving them more travel facilities to visit their loved ones back home.

It has granted a “Kargil allowance” to soldiers posted at high altitudes as a part of various measures to reduce psychological stress and the spate of suicides in the ranks. The allowance comes 8 years after the Kargil war, for posts created or re-occupied by the army.

According to experts, long absences from the family alongwith dangers encountered when they are engaged in patrolling and counter-insurgency operations put enormous strain on the soldiers, pushing some of them to commit suicide. Some of them do not get sleep for four days in a week.

According to Defence Ministry figures some 120 soldiers posted on the 6,300-metre (20,800-foot) high Siachen glacier, the world’s highest battlefield, and in the mountainous regions of Jammu and Kashmir committed suicide in 2006 and over 600 since 2003.

The other reason for the increase in the allowances is the shortage of officers who are overstretched because of their heavy commitments.  Official figures peg the shortfall of officers in the army alone at a shocking 24.1 per cent. Bluntly, the army is short by 11238 officers against an authorization of 46615.

While the measure has been cheered by the army, it is also an acknowledgement by the Government of the harsh Siachen Glacier-like conditions over long stretches of the border in which soldiers have to man isolated posts. Notwithstanding, Indo-Pak talk on pulling out troops from Siachen, the increase in the allowances means that the military is preparing to harden the J&K border.

There is no gainsaying, that the new policy of compensating soldiers in difficult areas, recognises positions located at heights between 14,000 ft and 19,000 ft as hardship posts. The allowance would be Rs 5,600 a month for officers and Rs 3,734 per month for personnel below that rank. The earlier allowance ranged between Rs 270 and Rs 1,600 per month for officers and men respectively.

The new scheme and an earlier decision to equip soldiers in Kargil, Dras, Mushkoh and Batalik in Kashmir, some sectors in Sikkim and Arunachal with “Siachen-like” uniforms and equipment, has made the spectre of “Siachenisation” that had hung over the Line of Control (LoC) now a reality.

The posts in the Ladakh region (excluding Siachen) and the sectors in Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh would take at least four mountain divisions (68,000 troops approximately) to be manned.

Additionally, soldiers engaged in counter-insurgency operations are now eligible for two free railway warrants a year against one as of now. Armed Forces personnel can now also travel to a station of their choice without any restrictions on mileage. This follows various representations made to Antony during his tours to forward areas in the North-east, J&K and Siachen.

Till date the Government was following laws made under the British that restricted travel by service personnel only to distances of 1,420 km. Ironically, the original rules were enacted to allow British nationals in India to travel to Mumbai to board ships bound for England.

Moreover, the Fifth Pay Commission implemented from 1997 onwards, saw an increase in the allowances compared to the Fourth Pay Commission. The flying allowance, for instance, has been hiked from Rs. 1,200 to Rs. 7,000 a month for pilots in the ranks of squadron leaders to group captains, flying officers and equivalent receive Rs. 4,500, flight lieutenants and equivalents Rs. 3,500 and the air commodores and equivalent  receive Rs. 5,500.

A similar increase has been implemented for the personnel of submarine and aviation units of the Indian Navy. This has been done because a large number of pilots and submarine mariners are taking premature retirement to join the greener pastures of civil airlines and ships respectively.

Recall, the pay package initially recommended by the Fifth Pay Commission had not been implemented due to misgivings in the services over risk-related allowances especially, allowances paid to pilots, submariners, and soldiers engaged in counter-insurgency operations or those serving in extremely difficult high altitude areas such as Siachen and Kargil. Personnel engaged in counter-insurgency operations received Rs. 1,000 to Rs. 3,900 a month depending on their ranks and the risks.

However, the allowances for officers and men posted on the Siachen glacier, and for those engaged in counter-insurgency operations were left untouched by the UnionCabinet last week as these would be reviewed by the Sixth Pay Commission.

Be that as it may, a lot more needs to be done to make the Armed Forces more attractive. The Parliamentary Standing Committee for Defence in its 11^th report has suggested, “Constitution of a high-level empowered committee for restructuring the Forces in order to make optimum use of limited resources and to suggest trimming with a corresponding increase in the use of sophisticated technology.” The Committee in its 15^th report lamented that these suggestion had been totally ignored by the Ministry.

Needless to say, by rationalising the rank structure, shedding organisational flab and reducing the shortage of officers would enhance the attractiveness of an army career. The Government has also referred its proposal to increase the retirement age of regimental commissioned officers to a group of ministers. It needs to be remembered that thousands of troops have been battling Islamic guerrillas in J&K since 1989. They have also been locked in jungle warfare with tribal and ethnic rebels in six of India's seven insurgency-riven North-eastern states.

In sum, even as the troops have appreciated the short-term measure of the enhancement of high altitude allowances but it is only a drop in the ocean. It cannot compensate hazardous and life threatening conditions and long separations of soldiers from their families. If the country wants that physically fit and mentally alert youth come forward to join the Armed Forces, the service conditions and poor pay and allowances have to be improved substantially. There should be an exclusive sixth pay commission for them. ---- INFA

(Copyright India News and Feature Alliance)

Defence Notes

New Delhi, 30 July 2007

Rising Suicides In Army

RESTORE DIGNITY, IMPROVE PAY

By Col. (Ret.) P. K. Vasudeva

There has been a sharp rise in suicides in Indian army in the past five years. The trend in the third largest and one of the best disciplined armies in the world is a cause of grave concern for the defence ministry, political leaders, psychiatrists and socio-economic circles besides the army. Over 100 soldiers took their lives last year alone. This alongwith killings by subordinates and colleagues has brought shame to the army. The reasons need to be investigated and remedial measures taken.

Though the army has not fought a full-blown war in the last three decades, the force is bogged down with fighting domestic insurgencies, guarding restive borders, responding to authorities request to quell civil riots, rescue operations during natural calamities like floods and cyclones, etc which is its  secondary role. 

Any suicide is one too many, but in this case the rate — less than 10 per 100,000 since 2001 — is not substantially different from the average for the general population. The rate for the US Army in 2005 was 13. Indeed, historically modern armies have had to grapple with the problem, with periodic ups and downs in the rates. Meanwhile, a growing trend of fratricidal killings within the Indian Army is of greater and immediate concern. 

Woman officer, Captain Megha Razdan took her life by hanging herself at her home in a cantonment area in Jammu. She left a suicide note. Another woman officer, Lieutenant Sushmita Chakraborty, fatally shot herself at Udhampur, the northern command headquarters, last June 2006. Pankaj Jha, a medium-level officer, shot himself with a service revolver. The list includes others such as Capt Sunit Kohli, Maj Sobha Rani, Lt Sushmita Chatterjee.

The country’s 1.1 million-strong army has recorded an annual average of 100 suicides in recent years, mainly due to the rigours of combating revolts in Kashmir and the remote North East. Dozens of soldiers, including officers, have also been killed by colleagues in quarrels over not being granted leave and other personal issues. The army has lost 72 soldiers to enemy attacks so far this year and another 32 have been killed by their colleagues.

Figures reveal that since 2002, over 450 soldiers have killed themselves, while about 100 died after being shot by their colleagues in the trouble-torn Jammu and Kashmir. StressKashmir and troops regularly kill their comrades in a region where a separatist revolt has claimed over 45,000 lives since 1989. levels are high among soldiers posted in

The Ministry of Defence has given the following figures of suicides: 120 in 2003, 116 in 2004, 119 in 2005 and 132 in 2006. In fact, concerned over the growing numbers, South Block has written to the Army to act more liberally in the grant of leave to its soldiers as a stress relieving measure.

The million-strong force, according to analysts, is under tremendous stress. In fact, the army is losing more soldiers in these incidents than in action against the enemy. Most experts attribute the growing stress to low morale, bad service conditions, lack of adequate home leave, unattractive pay and a communication gap with superiors. In addition family problems could also be a factor.  

To counter suicides, the Indian army is giving its soldiers psychology lessons. About 50 junior officers have now been trained in psychology to help their men battle the stress. In addition, it has introduced yoga to soldiers. Manas K Mandal, head of Defence Institute of Psychological Research, said he had interviewed about 2,000 military personnel and identified nearly 150 reasons for rising stress levels.

According to him soldiers should get counseling, both before they go on leave and on return to help them develop a strong attachment to their units. Other measures could be such as self-help steps to de-stress and encouraging soldiers not to shy away from seeking professional help. Changes would also need to be made in the selection of troops so that “we get the right man for the right job”.

Spokesman Col SK Sakhuja says soldiers kill each other when one of them perceives that they are being harassed by superiors or when they have heated arguments among themselves. “We have strengthened formal and informal interaction between soldiers and officers. Leave policy, especially for soldiers posted in difficult areas, has been liberalised so that a soldier can go home to sort out his domestic problems,” he says. “Also, counselling by officers, psychiatrics and religious teachers is being undertaken.” Delhi-based psychiatrist Achal Bhagat says a combination of stress and high alcohol consumption could lead to frayed nerves.

According to a study conducted by two Indian psychiatrists SK Das and S Chaudhry, the commonest psychotic disorder amongst Indian forces was 38.56 per cent schizophrenia, while alcohol dependence syndrome is 14.17 per cent and neurotic depression 9.8 per cent were among other disorders driving the personnel to suicide and killing their own colleagues.

The main causes of the suicides can also be broadly put across as: First, poor leadership. The armed forces do not need psychologists and psychiatrists to treat the soldiers. What it needs is proper leadership who can motivate their men in thick and thin. This poor leadership is because the intake in the armed forces is the last priority of the youth simply because of poor service conditions and poor promotion avenues. Despite being competent individuals, they get poor pay and allowances even after putting 20 to 30 years of service.

Second, the soldiers’ pay and allowances are less than that of a skilled labourer in the industry. Though the defence forces are responsible for maintaining the national sovereignty and integrity of the country, it is the lowest paid service and in a state of neglect. The soldiers retire at the age of 34 years after serving 17 years in the Army when their real life starts for earning and looking after their parents, family and children. The officers retire at an average age of 52 when they still have domestic responsibilities to shoulder.

Third, there is no coordination between the Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Defence otherwise all the armed forces men and officers could have served unto the age of 58 years through lateral entry. And last, the downward trend in the warrant of precedence has brought down the image of the defence services to the lowest ebb.

It is shocking that the armed forces are remembered only when there is an internal disturbance or external threat to the country. Once tackled, the defence forces are forgotten. Unless the service conditions are improved and the honour and dignity of the armed forces restored, the suicides will continue unabated resulting in poor demoralizing trend in the services. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

DEFENCE NOTES

New Delhi, 16 July 2007

Indo-Pak Arms Budget

 BELY PEACEFUL LIVING

By Col. P. K. Vasudeva (Retd)

Defence expenditure has been a major issue and an ongoing concern in the developing world, particularly in India and Pakistan. Especially as the money spent on arms is invariably at the expense of more pressing needs of social and infrastructure development. However, both countries are maintaining an autonomous capability to defend their nation's sovereignty.

Though Pakistan has no threat from India, it is determined to have arms superiority for annexing Kashmir. This has been the strategy of all its Governments --- past and present. Perhaps, also of future Governments.

In the past, Pakistan's defence expenditure has always been on the higher side. Notwithstanding, the fact that its fragile economy has been unable to support the military spending and it has been at the cost of expenses earmarked for development. The reasons put forth by Islamabad for it high defence budget is the perceived security threat from India, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (which gave the military an opportunity to fulfill its long desired modernization plans) and domestic factors such as societal violence and sectarianism.

Given the immense control the military enjoys over the decision-making process, the defence budget has been prioritised over the social sector. Thus, leading to the retarded growth of the social sector and has badly affected Pakistan's economy. Initially, the declining development budget was financed through debt. Consequently, debt repayment and debt servicing increased the non-development budget.

With the progression of time, borrowings have financed the non-development budget also. Currently, Pakistan is in a position where new loans are being acquired to repay the old ones. Plainly, the defence expenditure has escalated the miseries of Pakistan.

Today, a heavy debt burden, rising inflation and a nation starving for development mark the economy of Pakistan, but it continues to focus on its ever-increasing defence expenditure. Islamabad has always accorded priority to territorial security as compared to social and economic security, using the argument that only its military strength and stability can ensure the overall security of the country.

The Pakistan Government also believes that the effective defence of the borders and the resultant expenditure provide strong spin-off effects for the economy. The implementation of this belief is evident in the gradual increase in the nation's defence expenditure, despite the fact that the Pakistani economy is increasingly unable to support this burden. Resulting in the steadily widening gap between its economic growth and its defence expenditure. 

Hence its forces are currently on a modernisation drive with approved plans to acquire some of the most modern weapons systems. Pakistan has proposed an increase of about 10 per cent in its annual defence budget but the actual spending could be far higher as the Government said it planned to allocate separate funds for acquisition of F-16s multi-role fighter jets from the United States and the JF-17 Thunder fighters from China.

The allocation for defence for the financial year beginning from 1July 2007 has been increased to Rs. 275 billion from Rs. 250.2 billion in the budget presented by Minister of State for Finance Omar Ayub Khan. The defence outlay for 2007-08 is more than 17 per cent of the total budget outlay of Rs 1.8 trillion. “Pakistan is a nuclear power,” said Khan in his budget speech, adding, “If any one looks at us with bad motive, we will respond with full force”.

The Daily Times quoted a defence official and stated that the 10 per cent increase in the defence budget was made in view of the tense situation on the western border with Afghanistan, the rising cost of the war on terror and increasing inflation.

The Government, on its part, averred that the defence expenditure had been decreasing as a percentage of the total gross domestic products for the last five years. The defence spending was 6.5 per cent of Gross Domestic Produce (GDP) a few years ago, but it has now come down to 3.5 per cent of the GDP.

Significantly, Pakistan plans to buy a conglomeration of over 70 new and refurbished F-16 fighters fitted with latest weapons systems from the US and is also currently finalising plans to acquire 150 JF-17 Thunder fighters being jointly produced with China. The programme to manufacture the JF-17 Thunders apparently was on course against the backdrop that Russia has reportedly decided to supply 120 high-powered RD-93 jet engines, disregarding Indian objections.

On the other hand, India's defence spending for the year 2007-08 went up to Rs. 96,000 crore from the previous year's budgeted allocation of Rs. 89,000 crore. However, documents reveal that what was actually spent was just Rs. 86,000 crore. Therefore, in real terms, the increase in the current budget is 11.6 per cent or Rs.10,000 crore.

In 1999, India spent Rs. 48,500 crore on defence including the cost of the Kargil conflict.   Now the defence forces want that amount to be more than doubled. True, going by the current threat scenario the case for such a huge hike in the defence budget seems to be rather inflated as the peace process with Pakistan is under way. However, defence modernisation should continue.

Moreover, what is of primary importance is to get better and an improved quality of human resource as the present lot is not up to the mark given the rise in the incidents of suicides and shooting of fellow colleagues. This is possible if the career prospects of the armed forces personnel are made more attractive to draw highly motivated youth to the forces.

Thus, the military has planned a massive up gradation of its mainly 1990s-era weapons systems, mostly from its Cold War ally, the erstwhile Soviet Union, now Russia. The plans include the purchase of 126 new combat aircrafts to replace an ageing fleet of MiG-21s. Hence, a sum of Rs 41,000 crore has been allocated for capital expenditure against last year's budgeted figure of Rs. 37,500 crore.

According to the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, India figures at eighth and Pakistan at 38th in their defence spending out of all the countries in the world. The USChina on defence. In 2005, while India spent $22 billion ie 2.3 per cent of its GDP on defence, Pakistan spent $3.7 billion or 4.3 per cent of its GDP. spends the highest followed by

In sum, compared to Pakistan’s budget India must spend at least three per cent of its GDP on defence from the present 2.3 per cent if it wants to retain its supremacy among its hostile neighbours. A higher budgetary allocation would not only act as a security deterrent but also improve the lot of a neglected army and its soldiers who are the lowest paid in the country. ---- INFA

(Copyright India News and Feature Alliance)