Shivaji statue in Ladakh is part of an unfortunate trend. Indian Army must introspect

The most suitable place to honour Shivaji would have been Leh. As a regimental icon of the Maratha Light Infantry, his reverence should have been restricted to the unit area or the posts.

A statue of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj on the banks of Pangong Tso in Ladakh | X/@firefurycorps

On 26 December, two benchmark military events unfolded. China unveiled its sixth-generation fighter, while the Indian Army inaugurated a statue of 17th–century warrior king Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj on the bank of Pangong Tso in Eastern Ladakh to draw inspiration. The contrast is stark. 

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is conquering the frontiers of 21st-century military technology in all domains—air, land, sea, space, electromagnetic, cyber, and cognitive warfare. The Indian Army, too, is transforming to fight future wars. However, instead of showcasing its technological advancements or strategies to neutralise the adverse military differential, it seems to have a singular focus on celebrating its glorious civilisational military past while, surprisingly, ignoring its post-Independence achievements.

A month ago, Chief of the Army Staff General Upendra Dwivedi replaced the iconic ‘1971 Surrender in Dhaka’ painting in his official lounge—an image that showcased India’s greatest military victory in a millennium. The replacement is a painting steeped in religiosity, mythology, and echoes of a feudal past, with a sprinkling of decades-old military equipment. Apparently, this new artwork is meant to symbolise the Army’s evolution into a technologically advanced, modern, and integrated force, protecting the nation’s dharma. 

Now, the Army has taken Shivaji—whose military victories were rooted in the Deccan Plateau—over 2,500 km away to the high-altitude desert of Ladakh, in the form of a statue at Pangong Tso.

Like the displacement of the 1971 war painting, the installation of Shivaji’s statue has become controversial. If that was not enough, on 30 December, just four days later, General Dwivedi and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh participated in religious rituals at the Shri Mahakaleshwar Jyotirlinga Temple in Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh, with the General clad in saffron dhoti and sola, following temple traditions.

Regimental spirit carried too far

The 30–feet tall statue of Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj on horseback, with the Maratha flag behind it, was inaugurated by Lt Gen Hitesh Bhalla, GOC Fire and Fury Corps (14 Corps), in the presence of BJP Ladakh MP Jamyang Tsering Namgyal, military and civilian officials, and local leaders. 14 Corps, in a post on X, highlighted that Shivaji is “the towering symbol of valour, vision and unwavering justice” and the event celebrated “the unwavering spirit of the Indian ruler, whose legacy remains a source of inspiration for generations.”

Shivaji is the regimental icon of the Maratha Light Infantry, whose battle cry is ‘Bol Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Ki Jai’ (Hail Victory to Emperor Shivaji). The 27 Rashtriya Rifles, affiliated with the regiment, is responsible for defending an area near Pangong Tso with physical defences located on the Pangong Range. Normally, units display statues or paintings of their regimental icons in their areas. In this case, the logical place for a symbolic, appropriately size transportable statue would have been the unit base located 3 km from the Shivaji statue. The GOC of 14 Corps is the Colonel of the Maratha Light Infantry regiment. 

For reasons best known to the commander at whose level the decision was taken, a decision seems to have been made to install a larger-than-life, permanent statue in a public space, specifically at the well–known tourist site on the banks of Pangong Tso. While the inauguration itself was low–key, it was widely trumpeted on social media, with handouts and video excerpts provided to mainstream media. There was a clear intent to present it as an Army event of national importance. 

Given the statue’s size, artistic design, and structural strength that can withstand high-velocity winds and temperatures from –30°C to 40°C, its cost must have been very high. I wonder which funds were used to build it. I sincerely hope that the extremes of the weather have been catered for. It’s worth recalling that the Indian Navy faced national embarrassment when a Shivaji statue built under its supervision at the Rajkot Fort in Maharashtra—and inaugurated by PM Modi on 4 December (Indian Navy Day) 2023—collapsed on 26 August 2024. The PM later publicly apologised for the collapse. 

It is also pertinent to mention that the  BJP and RSS have a deep ideological association with Shivaji, who is considered the first Hindutva icon. Normally, political leaders are not invited to Army events. The notable presence of the BJP MP from Ladakh at the inauguration indicates that there is more to the event than meets the eye. 

National icon—out of place on Pangong Tso

There is no doubt that Shivaji is a national icon who challenged the might of the Mughal Empire in its heyday. However, his military victories occurred in western, central, and southern India, areas that formed the empire he carved. He was not connected to Ladakh’s military, political, social, or cultural history in any way. If he were to be honoured as a national figure, the most suitable place would have been Leh. As the regimental icon of the MLI, his reverence should have remained within the unit area or the posts. 

Ladakh, a secluded high-altitude kingdom, had a military history centred around self-preservation and warding off Tibetan invaders. It was General Zorawar Singh who captured Ladakh for the Dogra ruler of Jammu, Maharaja Gulab Singh, who owed allegiance to the Sikh Empire of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Leading a combined Sikh and Dogra army, Zorawar Singh also captured Baltistan and Western Tibet, reaching Mount Kailash and Mansarovar Lake. He was killed in action at Taklakot, and Western Tibet had to be abandoned. 

Ruins of mud forts are scattered across Eastern Ladakh, including one at Lukung, just three kilometres from where Shivaji’s statue now stands. The international boundaries of India are defined by the Treaty of Chushul, signed in 1842. If a military icon from authentic pre-Independence history were to be honoured, it should be Zorawar Singh. But why hark back to feudal India when we have heroes galore from battles fought in Ladakh in 1947-48, 1962, 1965, and 1971? 

Some of the most heroic battles were fought against all odds in Eastern Ladakh in 1962. Who can forget the battle of Rezang La, for which Major Shaitan Singh was posthumously awarded the Param Vir Chakra, or the Battle of Sirijap, which earned Major Dhan Singh Thapa another PVC?.

However, before erecting statues and monuments, it is also appropriate to consider local sentiments. Konchok Stanzin, the councillor for Chushul, which includes the area where the Shivaji statue is located, and a member of the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council, Leh, lamented, “As a local resident, I must voice my concerns about the Shivaji statue at Pangong. It was erected without local input, and I question its relevance to our unique environment and wildlife.” Political activist Sajjad Kargili voiced similar thoughts: “There is no cultural or historical relevance for Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj in Ladakh. While we respect his legacy, imposing such cultural symbols here is misplaced.”

Not a matter of faith

Four years ago, then-Chief of Defence Staff General Bipin Rawat paid obeisance at the Gorakhnath Temple in Gorakhpur, chaperoned by its head mahant, Yogi Adityanath—who is also the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. At the time, I defended General Rawat’s right to believe in and practice his faith. However, I put a rider that in the military, such expressions should remain private or be conducted at the Sarv Dharam Sthal with troops. Even symbolic visits to famous places of worship should uphold the military’s secular character and be handled with dignity. 

I strongly criticised him for compromising the Army’s secularity by visiting the temple alongside a chief minister known for being a vocal advocate of an ideology steeped in religion. 

On 30 December, COAS General Upendra Dwivedi committed a similar indiscretion by performing religious rituals at the Ujjain temple, alongside Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, who was there in a personal capacity. Singh was on a two-day official visit to military institutions in Madhya Pradesh. 

In fact, General Dwivedi took it a step further by dressing in saffron dhoti and sola, making himself indistinguishable from the temple priests. In similar circumstance, in June 2020, then-Chairman of the United States’ Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley had publicly regretted accompanying President Donald Trump for a photo op outside a church near the White House. “I should not have been there. My presence in that moment, and in that environment, created a perception of the military involved in domestic politics,” he had said.

I leave it for the COAS to explain the reasons or motivation for his conduct, but this does not augur well for the secular and apolitical credentials of the Army. 

In my view, the above three incidents are part of an unfortunate trend where the hierarchy of a secular and apolitical military is attempting to endear itself to political ideologies and power, potentially for personal ambition or post–retirement appointments. It is only a matter of time before this trend has a cascading effect on the psyche of the rank and file already facing the onslaught of the propaganda of political ideologies steeped in religion on social media. It is time for introspection and correction by the military hierarchy.

Lt Gen H S Panag PVSM, AVSM (R) served in the Indian Army for 40 years. He was GOC in C Northern Command and Central Command. Post retirement, he was Member of the Armed Forces Tribunal. Views are personal. 

(Edited by Aamaan Alam Khan)