ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

How Readers reacted to Admiral J G Nadkarni's last column

Date sent: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 11:40:07 -0400
From: "Samit Pandya" <samit@gte.net>
Subject: Admiral Nadkarni's article on conscription

I do not agree with Admiral Nadkarni's view. Yes, we all agree that we need to seek ways to find money for modernisation. However, I feel that while conscription will help in reducing manpower costs, it is something we should avoid as it would affect the combat effectiveness of the army. Yes, it was an all conscript Soviet army that steamrolled into Berlin in 1945; it was also an all conscript Soviet army that left Afghanistan in 1989. Yes, the US also had an army of conscripts that landed at Normandy, but it was also an army of conscripts that left Vietnam.

It was, however, an all volunteer force that defeated Saddam's conscript army in 1991.

I am no military expert, but it seems to me that the rules of engagement have changed. This has placed all sorts of requirements on today's soldier. This change in scenario requires an all-volunteer professional army which has career soldiers who can adapt to new military technology. This requires a special kind of individual -- not your everyday Joe Schmoe.

We can look at other ways to cut costs. Take for example the IAF, where we have different types of aircraft for the same assignment. The US air force, for example, has one, or at the most two, types of aircraft for each role. I have seen pictures of Indian soldiers with both the AK-47 as well as the bulky Ishapore rifles. The point I am trying to make with these examples is that this lack of standardisation in the armed forces is also quite a burden on the budget. The AK-47 and the Ishapore require different types of ammunition. The different types of aircraft in the IAF's inventory requires a multitude of spares which would definitely add to the costs of inventory tracking and control. Isn't there room for improvement in this area?

I am sure there are other areas where cost cutting can be done. As I mentioned earlier, today's military requirements are different from those of fifty years ago. Conscription is definitely not the answer. It is, in fact, a step backwards.

Date sent: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 01:40:06 -0500
From: Rahul Ved <raved@vassar.edu>
Subject: Only limited conscription can end army's manpower woes

I agree with the admiral's argument that India's armed forces need to be rehauled. However conscription, especially in a country like ours, is likely to be a highly unpopular solution. We are not a nation of fighters, we have strong family ties, and I don't think families would appreciate it very much if their children didn't come home as alive as they left -- wrapped in an Indian flag or otherwise.

I can think of a hundred far more useful things we could do with three years from each citizen's life. Instead of taking away these precious years, not to mention precious lives, I think the government should consider improving relations with our neighbours and among different sections of society. Instead of beating the same old drum all the time, maybe we ought to wake up and realise that we're a poor country which can't afford to get into big fights.

Compare the huge amount we spend on defence every year with the dismal sum that goes out for education, social infrastructure, health etc. Most people don't have access to basic sanitation, schooling, or even two good meals a day. Big guns, strong walls -- and nothing to protect! What sense of national pride do we have when we take our begging-bowl and go to the IMF each year?

The solution to the army's problem lies not with the army itself, but with our politicians, and I feel truly sorry for anybody whose solution lies in the hands of our politicians. But ultimately it is up to us, the electorate, to stick our tongues out at the next person who tries to blame it all on Pakistan. And it is up to people up there in the army to pressure the government to improve diplomatic relations instead of forcing us to lay down our lives for the votegathering brand of nationalism that is currently being advertised.

Date sent: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 15:13:30 +0800
From: Sriram <sriram@leonis.nus.edu.sg>
Subject: Conscription

Singapore has built a credible defence force largely based on conscription. It has had the added bonus of increasing cohesiveness in society when the conscripts return to college or their work after the national service.

For more details, see the article by Elizabeth Nair -- Conscription and Nation-Building in Singapore: A Psychological Analysis, Journal of Human Values, v1:1, p.93-102. published by Sage publications. The author may be reached at swkenair@nus.edu.sg (my neighbour).

Sriram

Date sent: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 12:34:58 MST
From: "Amol Joshi" <ahjoshi@hotmail.com>
Subject: Only limited conscription can end army's manpower woes

Pretty impressive article. Indian government should indeed look at it as a need of the time. In fact, Swatantryaveer Savarkar had urged the national youth to join the army, or at least get trained and serve it for a while. The article fully portrays the insight the readers expect from a good serviceman. Should India go in for the draft -- hey, you have a supporter here!

Amol H Joshi

Admiral J G Nadkarni (retired)

Tell us what you think of this feature