Once seen as a fading presence on India’s investment & startup picture, the state is slowly moving up the ladder, with policy reforms & infrastructure building.
Agreement signed during 17th Joint Working Group (JWG) on defence cooperation. Defence Secretary Rajesh Kumar Singh met Director General in Israeli Ministry of Defence Amir Baram Tuesday.
This world is being restructured and redrawn by one man, and what’s his power? It’s not his formidable military. It’s trade. With China, it turned on him.
Persons like Lt. Gen. Hanut Singh will come to this world only once in a lifetime. Great and outstanding person, Commander, War Strategist and benevolent person. Chivalry, Compassion towards his soldiers, and team work used to be his Strategy. Without his input, we would not have won the 1971 war. Great person. God’s gift to our nation.
I don’t get it. All that has been established here is that he commanded the unit well, as a Lt Col, in battle. That does not not necessarily qualify a man to be COAS in his time., or does it?
What qualifies a man to be a COAS or any service chief? Seniority? Playing the “political game”?
Where does single minded pursuit of the profession of arms and warfighting, competence in the actual field of battle, and ability to transform one’s service in truly strategic and cultural terms (Something Sundarji tried but ultimately failed at) rank?
The profile establishes a lot more than Gen Hanut’s ” coup d’oeil” (a priceless trait for a military commander you will agree) as Poona Horse’s Commandant in the Battle of Basantar/Barapind. Note his sterling work at Ahmednagar on training and tactics and the courage of conviction to stand up to the flamboyant Sundarji on Brasstacks.
Not a bad CV for the top job, some would say.
The Political dispensation in the Subcontinent demands ‘Patwaris’ and not the frontline Generals. Strong Army Commanders not in t. hier interest. ‘Hujoor Ka istakbal buland ho’ psyche is what expected here. That is precisely the reason we are having Patwaris going on top and not the Bold professional Soldiers like Gen Gamut Singh.
Undoubtedly a General among Generals, he did have his quirks. Therefore, notwithstanding his outstanding valour and generalship, it was , and will remain that quirky personalities leading huge armies in democracies where governments dictate strategies are not, actually, the front runners as far as Governments are concerned. Another case in point is Lt Gen PS Bhagat of the Corps of Engineers. A Victoria Cross awardee and the GOC-in-C who raised Northern Command after the ‘71 war. He too was denied the Chief’s chair and sidelined to the DVC.
What a travesty that this excellent profile on Gen “Hunty” with its larger implications for the state of the Indian military has not garnered a single comment while mediocre articles on military hardware or some operation get scores of comments.
Articles such as these focus on the real challenge for all militaries, especially Indian – of a Few Good Men. There are simply too few people of both the character and intellectual caliber to be successful operational military commanders, that create both culture and systemic excellence as well as show individual flair and leadership. Indian Army arguable has had two or three in its entire history – Generals Sagat Singh, Zoru Bakshi and Hanut Singh.
One wished the author would have focused more on the reported skirmish that happened between then COAS Gen Sundarji – a brilliant, but overhyped and operationally “weak” general responsible for his share of debacles, and Gen “Hunty” during Brasstacks.
Sundarji – who cherished merit and was not insecure like the majority of Indian military leaders – had rehabilitated the brilliant but acerbic “Hunty” into the Strike Corps job but the latter was in no mood to indulge the COAS in his military fantasy of cutting Pakistan into two. Not only were there operational constraints that Sundarji was being cavalier about, if successful how would the Indian Army have fared as an occupation force (See US in Iraq)? Luckily Rajiv Gandhi too saw sense and pulled the plug on what could have been a major misadventure.
Shedding more light on this episode would have illustrated the contrast between the conceptual and operational levels of war which can be the difference between masterstroke and disaster and something most stategic commentators and keyboard warriros alike fail to understand.
-Firstly thank you for appreciating the value of the Military in a Nation’s Affairs. We incl our defence journalists are too caught up in the Superficial & outer form , rather than substance‼️the critical factor will be leadership , both Operational & cutting edge.
– I concur with your observation that a more detailed analysis of their respective styles would have been valuable , I hav alluded to it but this was written overnight to meet a deadline .Though the jury is still out , I personally would hav put greater stress on momentum ,, specially on the open Desert Flank . Regards
Sir,
I used always wonder about operation brass tacks,now only got the thing,yes at that time we were too young and general sundarji was a sort of hero who had the guts to attack.
Though unfortunately we are a ungrateful nation and never recognise leaders like him.
Hats off!
I served with then Major General Hanut Singh at his Division HQ in 1982. Later after he and I were out of the Army, we met often: more often at his residence. He had a a sign in his living room for the benifit of visitors. It read, “यहां केवल प्रभु चर्चा करें, अन्यथा मौन धारण करें । He had no time for idle gossip. My information is that he was cleared for promotion to Army Commander but he turned down his promotion. He had barely six months or so before superannuation. In the interest of the service he stepped aside to allow a full tenure to the next man in line.
Col Vijay , thank you for sharing ,, 2 comments:
– He was overlooked for promotion to Army Cdr,, this is factually correct , he took it in his stride.
– when I visited him at his ashram while Commanding 1Corps , I was told the same ,but such was his love for the army that we discussed the Ops of 1Corps over a roughly drawn sketch of the Shakargarh Bulge for over an hour , with a resolve to meet again ?
A great remark ” यहां केवल प्रभु चर्चा करें, अन्यथा मौन धारण करें । ” and the General knew that in the final scheme of things – this is all that matters !
A wonderful elaboration of military leadership, in present day their is a vacuum of such personalities. Our military history must include the such personalities for future generations.
A commentary filled with soul that brings back the man in flesh and blood.
But the bitter truth that men of straw and feet of clay now crowd the top begs consideration- Why ?
A great man.
The more one reads about him,the more one wants to know about his life.
May more army officers and jawans who served under this great man share their experiences so we can all be inspired and maybe some of us will then choose to follow in his footsteps and make the nation proud
When U r Lt. General..U r proud n a nationalist..anyone in that post has d caliber to be Army Chief.. in our country Cast State People in Govt matters. Many are eliminated becoz not caliber n professiional history matters to people in government. Mera admi. Mera state, meri jaati..this is one of the.prominent factor which diminishes n clips d wings of the most deserving.. it’s sad.. but will keep happening ..yet I m optimistic that a day will.come when only knowledge, talent n result will matter..
I have served with Gen Hanut Singh in 17 and 1 armd div s and also in 2 corps. for about 6 years as his PA and known him closely. Whatever writer has written are true facts. I appreciate the writer and has great regards for his thoughts to highlight what was gen Hanut . I salute the writer for bringing out the facts
Since 1997 no one from the Armoured Corps has become army chief. Thereby hangs a legacy, paradoxically involving an infantry officer who loved – perhaps too much – the armoured corps and mechanized forces. After independence till 1983, only two from the Armoured Corps were chiefs – Generals Rajendrasinghji and Chaudhary. The third armoured corps chief, Gen Vaidya, came by superceding an infantry officer. It was Vaidya’s successor, Gen Sunderji, considered the father of mechanized warfare, who changed the face of the army. An infantry officer, Sunderji became the first non-armoured corps officer to command an armoured division. His pre-occupation with the armoured- cum-mechanized structure of warfare saw an unprecedented six his eight PSOs from the armoured corps. From 1983 to 1997 the Indian army saw four armoured corps officers as chiefs – Gens Vaidya, VN Sharma, BC Joshi and Roychowdhary, with only one artillery officer intervening – Gen Rodrigues. If you include Sunderji it becomes five. But post 1997, till date, not a single armoured corps officer has become chief. The closest was Lt Gen Bakshi, who was superceded by the present chief. The revenge of the infantry will continue. In fact the rumour is that infantry will ensure that only they will be chiefs for another 20 years. Whether this is good only time will tell. But the army is an organism and it needs variety in its DNA to keep it resilient, robust and vibrant as well as a repository of knowledge and experience of all types of military warfare. Hanut Singh was a victim of the Infantry vs Other Arms internal turf war.
Persons like Lt. Gen. Hanut Singh will come to this world only once in a lifetime. Great and outstanding person, Commander, War Strategist and benevolent person. Chivalry, Compassion towards his soldiers, and team work used to be his Strategy. Without his input, we would not have won the 1971 war. Great person. God’s gift to our nation.
I don’t get it. All that has been established here is that he commanded the unit well, as a Lt Col, in battle. That does not not necessarily qualify a man to be COAS in his time., or does it?
What qualifies a man to be a COAS or any service chief? Seniority? Playing the “political game”?
Where does single minded pursuit of the profession of arms and warfighting, competence in the actual field of battle, and ability to transform one’s service in truly strategic and cultural terms (Something Sundarji tried but ultimately failed at) rank?
The profile establishes a lot more than Gen Hanut’s ” coup d’oeil” (a priceless trait for a military commander you will agree) as Poona Horse’s Commandant in the Battle of Basantar/Barapind. Note his sterling work at Ahmednagar on training and tactics and the courage of conviction to stand up to the flamboyant Sundarji on Brasstacks.
Not a bad CV for the top job, some would say.
The Political dispensation in the Subcontinent demands ‘Patwaris’ and not the frontline Generals. Strong Army Commanders not in t. hier interest. ‘Hujoor Ka istakbal buland ho’ psyche is what expected here. That is precisely the reason we are having Patwaris going on top and not the Bold professional Soldiers like Gen Gamut Singh.
It is common in every field. But this kind of person live by their own terms as long as in the game. He become Lt. Gen at least.
What else to expect from the Gandh(i) pariwar. Sangh pariwar is better and day
Undoubtedly a General among Generals, he did have his quirks. Therefore, notwithstanding his outstanding valour and generalship, it was , and will remain that quirky personalities leading huge armies in democracies where governments dictate strategies are not, actually, the front runners as far as Governments are concerned. Another case in point is Lt Gen PS Bhagat of the Corps of Engineers. A Victoria Cross awardee and the GOC-in-C who raised Northern Command after the ‘71 war. He too was denied the Chief’s chair and sidelined to the DVC.
What a travesty that this excellent profile on Gen “Hunty” with its larger implications for the state of the Indian military has not garnered a single comment while mediocre articles on military hardware or some operation get scores of comments.
Articles such as these focus on the real challenge for all militaries, especially Indian – of a Few Good Men. There are simply too few people of both the character and intellectual caliber to be successful operational military commanders, that create both culture and systemic excellence as well as show individual flair and leadership. Indian Army arguable has had two or three in its entire history – Generals Sagat Singh, Zoru Bakshi and Hanut Singh.
One wished the author would have focused more on the reported skirmish that happened between then COAS Gen Sundarji – a brilliant, but overhyped and operationally “weak” general responsible for his share of debacles, and Gen “Hunty” during Brasstacks.
Sundarji – who cherished merit and was not insecure like the majority of Indian military leaders – had rehabilitated the brilliant but acerbic “Hunty” into the Strike Corps job but the latter was in no mood to indulge the COAS in his military fantasy of cutting Pakistan into two. Not only were there operational constraints that Sundarji was being cavalier about, if successful how would the Indian Army have fared as an occupation force (See US in Iraq)? Luckily Rajiv Gandhi too saw sense and pulled the plug on what could have been a major misadventure.
Shedding more light on this episode would have illustrated the contrast between the conceptual and operational levels of war which can be the difference between masterstroke and disaster and something most stategic commentators and keyboard warriros alike fail to understand.
-Firstly thank you for appreciating the value of the Military in a Nation’s Affairs. We incl our defence journalists are too caught up in the Superficial & outer form , rather than substance‼️the critical factor will be leadership , both Operational & cutting edge.
– I concur with your observation that a more detailed analysis of their respective styles would have been valuable , I hav alluded to it but this was written overnight to meet a deadline .Though the jury is still out , I personally would hav put greater stress on momentum ,, specially on the open Desert Flank . Regards
Sir,
I used always wonder about operation brass tacks,now only got the thing,yes at that time we were too young and general sundarji was a sort of hero who had the guts to attack.
Though unfortunately we are a ungrateful nation and never recognise leaders like him.
Hats off!
I salute to our army legendary Lt Gen Hanut singh
I served with then Major General Hanut Singh at his Division HQ in 1982. Later after he and I were out of the Army, we met often: more often at his residence. He had a a sign in his living room for the benifit of visitors. It read, “यहां केवल प्रभु चर्चा करें, अन्यथा मौन धारण करें । He had no time for idle gossip. My information is that he was cleared for promotion to Army Commander but he turned down his promotion. He had barely six months or so before superannuation. In the interest of the service he stepped aside to allow a full tenure to the next man in line.
Col Vijay , thank you for sharing ,, 2 comments:
– He was overlooked for promotion to Army Cdr,, this is factually correct , he took it in his stride.
– when I visited him at his ashram while Commanding 1Corps , I was told the same ,but such was his love for the army that we discussed the Ops of 1Corps over a roughly drawn sketch of the Shakargarh Bulge for over an hour , with a resolve to meet again ?
A great remark ” यहां केवल प्रभु चर्चा करें, अन्यथा मौन धारण करें । ” and the General knew that in the final scheme of things – this is all that matters !
A wonderful elaboration of military leadership, in present day their is a vacuum of such personalities. Our military history must include the such personalities for future generations.
Chamachagiri bahut karnapadata Indian army me tab age badsakta real hero udar ka udari rahajata hi unko kuch nai milta
A commentary filled with soul that brings back the man in flesh and blood.
But the bitter truth that men of straw and feet of clay now crowd the top begs consideration- Why ?
A good observation. Pl read the chapter on Military Leadership in my recently edited book “ Military Strategy for India in the 21st Century”.
No comparisons today, a breed of men who did their job quietly and professionally. It is said that soldiers don’t die, they fade away.
A great man.
The more one reads about him,the more one wants to know about his life.
May more army officers and jawans who served under this great man share their experiences so we can all be inspired and maybe some of us will then choose to follow in his footsteps and make the nation proud
A true soldier…
Excellent notes on our legendary Gen Hanut singh…thankyou very much for the sharing .
Jai hind ki sena
When U r Lt. General..U r proud n a nationalist..anyone in that post has d caliber to be Army Chief.. in our country Cast State People in Govt matters. Many are eliminated becoz not caliber n professiional history matters to people in government. Mera admi. Mera state, meri jaati..this is one of the.prominent factor which diminishes n clips d wings of the most deserving.. it’s sad.. but will keep happening ..yet I m optimistic that a day will.come when only knowledge, talent n result will matter..
I salute to Brave officer col bal.This great loss to indian army and our nation.
I have served with Gen Hanut Singh in 17 and 1 armd div s and also in 2 corps. for about 6 years as his PA and known him closely. Whatever writer has written are true facts. I appreciate the writer and has great regards for his thoughts to highlight what was gen Hanut . I salute the writer for bringing out the facts
a RAJPUT OFFICER suffered because of Anti-Rajput policies of Congress
Since 1997 no one from the Armoured Corps has become army chief. Thereby hangs a legacy, paradoxically involving an infantry officer who loved – perhaps too much – the armoured corps and mechanized forces. After independence till 1983, only two from the Armoured Corps were chiefs – Generals Rajendrasinghji and Chaudhary. The third armoured corps chief, Gen Vaidya, came by superceding an infantry officer. It was Vaidya’s successor, Gen Sunderji, considered the father of mechanized warfare, who changed the face of the army. An infantry officer, Sunderji became the first non-armoured corps officer to command an armoured division. His pre-occupation with the armoured- cum-mechanized structure of warfare saw an unprecedented six his eight PSOs from the armoured corps. From 1983 to 1997 the Indian army saw four armoured corps officers as chiefs – Gens Vaidya, VN Sharma, BC Joshi and Roychowdhary, with only one artillery officer intervening – Gen Rodrigues. If you include Sunderji it becomes five. But post 1997, till date, not a single armoured corps officer has become chief. The closest was Lt Gen Bakshi, who was superceded by the present chief. The revenge of the infantry will continue. In fact the rumour is that infantry will ensure that only they will be chiefs for another 20 years. Whether this is good only time will tell. But the army is an organism and it needs variety in its DNA to keep it resilient, robust and vibrant as well as a repository of knowledge and experience of all types of military warfare. Hanut Singh was a victim of the Infantry vs Other Arms internal turf war.