Two major cases of fratricide within six months in the Indian Army have put the spotlight back on the issue. On 12 April, a soldier shot and killed four colleagues at Bathinda military station in Punjab for alleged sexual assault. On 5 October, a Major from a Rashtriya Rifles Battalion at Thanamandi in Jammu and Kashmir opened fire and threw a grenade injuring three officers, including his Commanding Officer.
According to the Ministry of Defence, there were 83 cases of fratricide cases in the armed forces from 2000 to 2012. Between 2014 and March 2021, there were 18 cases of fratricide in the Army and two cases in the Indian Air Force. The actual cases may be higher as there is a marked tendency to cover up fratricide as “enemy/terrorist action” or “accidental firing” of weapons by all militaries.
What is fratricide?
Fratricide is the act of killing one’s brother or a member of one’s own tribe or group. All over the world, armies consider themselves as a family, a way of life, where soldiers are brothers in arms. Though not a formal military term, fratricide is generally used to describe the killing of a colleague, subordinate or superior. Under military law, the offender is charged for murder under Section 69 of the Army Act read in conjunction with the Indian Penal Code. In militaries where organised use of force against the enemy is sine qua non, it is considered a very heinous crime. The term fratricide also covers the act of firing on own troops or equipment, believing them to be the enemy, which is also punishable as dereliction of duty. The focus in this article will be on the criminal act.
The degree of prevalence of fratricide is a measure of an army’s state of discipline, morale and leadership. A case in point is the US Army in Vietnam. By the late 1960s, it was clear that the US military was fighting an unpopular and unwinnable war. A largely conscripted army was low on morale and discipline, and vented its frustration on the hapless population, committing horrendous human rights violations. More than that, it also indulged in fratricide at an unprecedented scale.
In Vietnam, fratricide was popularly known as fragging due to the weapon used most frequently – the fragmentation grenade. As per Vietnam lore, the use of the term ‘fragging’ began 53 years ago, on the night of 23 October 1970. A Marine Private, Garry A Hendricks, slighted by the admonishment by Sergeant Richard L Tate for sleeping on sentry duty the previous night, tossed a fragmentation through the air vent of the sergeant’s bunker, killing him and wounding two other sergeants.
From 1969 to 1971, 730 superior NCOs/officers or colleagues in Vietnam were killed by disgruntled, revengeful, slighted, unfairly treated or stressed soldiers using fragmentation grenades. As per some estimates, the figure was as high as 1,000. The popularity of the fragmentation grenade was due to its devastating effect, easy availability, zero accountability (unlike rifles and pistols, which are issued by name), and no tell-tale evidence so long as there were no fingerprints on the holding pin and the lever. A fragmentation grenade could also easily be used as a booby trap. Moreover, there were cases of “bounty hunting” wherein soldiers pooled money, which was claimed by the soldier who killed an unpopular superior.
Interestingly, since the Vietnam war, the all-volunteer US Army has rarely witnessed any incidents of fratricide in Iraq and Afghanistan over two decades. This change was due to a better climate of leadership where soldiers were treated as individuals and there was enhanced focus on welfare.
Also read: Fratricide? Suicide? Army-police disagreement deepens mystery at Bathinda Military Station
Causes of fratricide
Neither the Indian Army nor the MoD has formally published any consolidated data on the number of fratricide cases. The spotlight falls only when the media exposes such cases. To safeguard the reputation of units, a fair number of cases get covered up as “accidental fire” or shown as “enemy/terrorist action”. It is pertinent to mention that despite the slight pressure that is required to pull a trigger, weapons do not easily fire when accidentally dropped on the ground or in any other manner normally alleged.
As per my assessment, about six to ten fratricide cases happen every year. The figures are not alarming for the 1.3-million strong armed forces, but it should be a matter of concern, prompting the military to ensure remedial action. Incidentally, the figures for the post-Vietnam US Army are lower than India’s.
Militaries are reluctant to conduct in-depth studies of the incidents of fratricide to safeguard their reputation. In cases that are covered up, secrecy is omnipresent. Even the US Army has no formal records of fratricide during the Vietnam War. However, based on experience of veterans and military scholars, the fundamental reasons are poor leadership climate; lack of discipline; perceived unfair treatment; inadequate attention to soldier’s welfare, particularly leave; inter-personal rivalries among colleagues; and psychological victimisation, humiliation and sexual harassment/exploitation by superiors/colleagues. Stress and strain of service due to a rigorous and regimented life under the shadow of the gun, prolonged separation from family, inability to cope with domestic commitments, lack of community living, lack of sexual fulfilment, and curtailed freedoms/rights is a constant contributory factor. However, the trigger is always an immediate incident.
Most of these problems can be easily overcome by improving the leadership climate, motivation, enforcement of discipline, and meaningful welfare. However, inadequate attention is paid to a soldier’s mental health. Psychiatrists are only available at major military hospitals. The procedures laid down for handling psychiatric cases are humiliating. Patients are held, escorted, and treated under armed guards. In any case, such treatment is for serious psychotic disorders. What the common soldier needs is psychological care and counselling.
This is the responsibility of all military leaders but they do not have requisite expertise to cater for the present-day psychological problems. The armed forces have endeavoured to fill the void by employing its Religious Teachers (who are Junior Commissioned Officers) and Army Education Corps Instructors, after basic counselling training, in a secondary role to counsel soldiers.
In my view, this is an inadequate, amateurish, and informal effort. There is an urgent need to induct trained psychologists as Territorial Army officers at the scale of one per brigade and air base, and at the appropriate level in the Indian Navy. These officers can train and oversee the work of the Religious Teachers and Army Education Corps Instructors. The process of counselling and psychological profiling of soldiers needs to be formalised.
Let there be no doubt that all cases of fratricide and suicide in the armed forces have a mental health backdrop, apart from other causes that act as the immediate trigger. It is time the Indian armed forces focussed more on soldiers’ emotional and psychological well-being.
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 Armed Forces Tribunal. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prashant)