RAUL SODAT NAJWA
Blogger
Chandigarh, India
10 Jan. 16
Mr. Nalin Mehta
Social Scientist, Writer, Consulting Expert with Times of
India
Twitter: @nalinmehta
Subject: views on ‘our security setup is stuck in Mountbatten-Ismay era'
1.
I am sure you don’t belong to Mountbatten-Ismay
era and none of us can judge the security setup of that era because security
setup is not only about the weapons but also tactics, training of soldiers, administration
and morale, military law and current affairs. Security has a wide perspective which
is beyond your imagination.
2.
Nalin you are a social scientist, writer and a
journalist. You had also held senior positions at UN and global fund in Geneva.
You have taught at the various universities worldwide with primary interest in
politics, culture and social life of India. Well none of these show that you
are qualified enough to make technical comments about the security setup. I
have studied post-graduation diploma in Military Studies and Defence Management
and with my qualification and experience academically, I felt I should write
this letter to you and make you aware about the facts and absurdity about your
blogpost on times of India.
3.
National Security Guards are more than Rambo.
They are finely trained commandos, with difficult screening system. They are
trained on more than 40 weapons and are specialist in non-conventional warfare
or more specifically for counter terrorist operation in urban areas. I hope you
are aware that during the Mountbatten-Ismay era, there were no such specialised
forces for low intensity conflict operations of urban regions. This simple fact
implies that our security setup is highly updated and with every
success/failure the military think-tanks are making and implementing the
recommendations. So the complete process is beyond your imagination.
4.
Pathankot did not prove what you are trying to
imply. Pathankot proved that we are capable of preventing any incidence of a
scale which could be big as the terrorist attack on Pakistan Air Base. It
proved that it is not easy to achieve the aim against the Indian security
setup. It showed the veterans who were in Defence Security Corps had still the
bravery left to counter terrorist.
5.
The military operation at Pathankot to flush out
terrorist did not go wrong, it is the media which made it to appear like as it
was in case of Mumbai attacks. In 26/11, your fellow media colleagues kept
updating about the security forces moment outside the Taj Hotel, which actually
ended surprise. I am sure you must not be aware that in any military operation,
surprise is one of the most important factors. Even in case of Pathankot, it
was tried to keep the moments of security forces as covert as possible but
thanks to your several media brothers, they kept updating. Rambo succeeded
because there was no media involved in the drama. I believe there should be
case study of the media reporting during military operations, so that surprise
is maintained and losses of life can be prevented to a better extent.
6.
Why you haven’t highlighted the losses which
Indian Army suffered during the 90s in Jammu and Kashmir when militancy was on
the peak? India is the most successful country to curb terrorism in the world;
it is not USA, UK or Russia. In military world, India is considered as the
expert of low intensity conflict operation and the European countries are eager
to train their armies with Indian Army. India did not grow in 90s and the GDP
is breaking all the records in 21st century because Indian Army is
able to control terrorist activities and established peace to an extent. I don’t
think so; any army in the world of Mountbatten would have achieved what Indian
Army has done it.
7.
With each terrorist attack, we come to know the
lack of knowledge of journalists. Even a retired army Jawan is qualified enough
to present better military views than a journalist. An average journalist
cannot differentiate between paramilitary forces and army. I am sure a
journalist cannot tell me that what difference is there between military and
army. Deeper question is that Indian journalists are qualified enough to debate
on India’s security management?
8.
Nalin, it is not your job to self-examine the
security setup. Self-examine means the concerned people need to examine it. If
you want to do self-examination then kindly examine your journalism or the
college lectures. Indian Armed Forces has come up very far since 1947. Nalin,
the security system is not as same as it was 69 years back, it updated with the
modern trend. The Signal corps of Indian Army has the communication system
which is highly advance than any other communication system held with airtel, Vodafone,
Reliance Comm or BSNL.
9.
The Kargil Review Committee recommended that the
promotion system of officers has not been updated with time on contrary done by
our hostile countries. The commanding officer of an Infantry Battalion used to
be old, and couldn’t lead the battalion due to the age factor in the battle,
similarly a major who is company commander with 115 odd men under him used to
be old with 13 years of service. After Kargil war, Indian Army updated the
promotion system, and the leadership of an infantry company is in the hands of
much younger officer. One of the biggest reforms done by Indian Army which was
brought in place after the case study which was done by the qualified people
and not so called journalist.
10.
There is an Integrated Headquarters in ministry
of defence, DIA is in place and there is something like National Defence
University which cannot be disclosed because of security reasons. I believe you
should include retired army officers in your friend circle so that you can
update your knowledge.
11.
Your article looks like collection of random
facts collected from internet and written without paying attention to the
latest trends.
12.
Don’t compare US or China with Indian Military.
Their tactics includes showing things five times more than what it is really on
ground so that the enemy will fear declaring war on them. This tactics is
straight from the books of Sun-Tzu, the great military tactician of ancient
China. India has always kept its military affairs secret, and a civilian cannot
even imagine the strength Indian Army possesses. It is so strong that even US
will think hundred times before attacking India. Indian Army is so strong that
it divided a country into two in 1971 and just for sake of criticizing you are
saying that the security setup and Armed forces is still in the era of 2nd
world war. I think your facts gone wrong on this issue.
13.
Are you aware that how many raids Indian Army
had carried out successfully against the enemy in 2000s with zero casualties?
In a raid, 80 percent casualty is acceptable and Indian Army achieved zero
casualty rates in ninety five percent of its raids. Average journalists even
can’t imagine about it. How can I forget the raid carried behind enemy line in
Myanmar which had received appreciation from all over the world and huge media coverage.
But you still chose to defame our security setup by terming it as ‘stuck in Mountbatten era’.
14.
No pressure is required on defence as Indian
Armed Forces have the best leadership in place. KRC recommendations which were
implementable are already in place.
15.
Mr. Nalin, update your journalism structure
before questioning defence of India. Our soldiers doesn’t deserve criticism
form highly unqualified people who are unable to do constructive criticism.
16.
Nalin, I hope you will convey my message to rest
of your journalist friends. I appreciate your efforts to help soldiers but
there was a need of more efforts in this issue.
Raul sodat Najwa
Comments
Post a Comment