The problem, as I see it, with Mr Raghavan’s prescriptions, is that they hide a little more than what they state. Perhaps that is to be expected. Authors and academics, at least in our country, need access to the institutions. In the case of Mr. Raghavan, he needs access to both the military and the civilian bureaucracy-hence this namby pamby analysis and avoidance of the core issue.
The fact is that in this country, more than any other, only those officers, be they civilian or military get promoted who specialise in not rocking the boat. Unless the preference for such officers changes, the country will continue muddling along. We will have far greater casualties than anywhere else for much smaller gain or loss than anywhere else. But the human life in this country in reality has so little value that no one has qualm in men dying. And Chiefs who say that we will fight with what we have-meaning that he will lose any number of men fighting rather lose his post, instead of being shown the door, are lionised even after retirement.
It is my forlorn hope that things change in my lifetime and the men get the officers and Chiefs they deserve and not time servers.
“None of our professional military education institutions provide any serious training on these (policy) issues”
Srinath Raghavan has written nice piece from historical perspective on CMR but the above conjunctur of his is absolutely out of place.
The military officers are highly qualified, including training in matters of policy, yet there are a few opportunities, and those are through using referential power exercise by individuals.
There is no institutional avenues for exercising their potential, given a chance after neutralizing exercise of referent power, the services officers will do much better than the civilian bureaucracy.
With in military these experts are not been nurtured because of
different kind of organisational need and hierarchical structure.
This space the civilian bureaucracy does not wish to concede which they have acquired over a period driving the politicians from nose.
The problem, as I see it, with Mr Raghavan’s prescriptions, is that they hide a little more than what they state. Perhaps that is to be expected. Authors and academics, at least in our country, need access to the institutions. In the case of Mr. Raghavan, he needs access to both the military and the civilian bureaucracy-hence this namby pamby analysis and avoidance of the core issue.
The fact is that in this country, more than any other, only those officers, be they civilian or military get promoted who specialise in not rocking the boat. Unless the preference for such officers changes, the country will continue muddling along. We will have far greater casualties than anywhere else for much smaller gain or loss than anywhere else. But the human life in this country in reality has so little value that no one has qualm in men dying. And Chiefs who say that we will fight with what we have-meaning that he will lose any number of men fighting rather lose his post, instead of being shown the door, are lionised even after retirement.
It is my forlorn hope that things change in my lifetime and the men get the officers and Chiefs they deserve and not time servers.
“None of our professional military education institutions provide any serious training on these (policy) issues”
Srinath Raghavan has written nice piece from historical perspective on CMR but the above conjunctur of his is absolutely out of place.
The military officers are highly qualified, including training in matters of policy, yet there are a few opportunities, and those are through using referential power exercise by individuals.
There is no institutional avenues for exercising their potential, given a chance after neutralizing exercise of referent power, the services officers will do much better than the civilian bureaucracy.
With in military these experts are not been nurtured because of
different kind of organisational need and hierarchical structure.
This space the civilian bureaucracy does not wish to concede which they have acquired over a period driving the politicians from nose.
This is causing the rift between the two.