The case of Lt Samuel Kamalesan was a rare clash between an officer’s beliefs and the Army’s traditions, but today’s climate of politicised religiosity and a hierarchy pandering to it makes reform urgent.
Event commemorations, temple inaugurations, and multi-faith parades can coexist with the strict protection of every citizen’s right to belief and dissent.
With regional parties struggling to project a unified Opposition in Parliament, and no leader in Delhi able to mediate, Centre-state tensions are playing out as open conflict.
Instead of buying more Mirages outright in early 2000s, the requirement was tweaked in favour of a medium-weight, multi-role fighter with Mirage-like performance.
Pakistan not only has zero chance of catching up with India in most areas, but will inevitably see the gap rising. Its leaders will offer its people the same snake oil in different bottles.
The author is a retired Army Cdr, one of the top 6 in the hierarchy. Hard to fathom this post retirement empathy on such a silly issue when he was in a position to change things. Did he? Nopes. Why does all this gyan and enlightenment boil to the surface post retirement in the top brass? Let’s address this issue first and leave cases of insubordination to the organisation and the courts.
I’m sorry but I’d disagree with the claim that this dismissal reflects a ‘colonial mindset’.
Such narrow-mindedness belongs neither in politics, nor in the armed forces. The officer’s misconduct lies not in his Christian faith (or someone’s hypothetical Muslim faith), but in the idea that religion, to them, is conclusive, exclusive, separative, and competitive (explained below). This view of religion underlies reactions like his, and it is precisely why the common all-faiths worship tradition of the military was anathema to, and ill behoves, an officer.
(Explanations of terms)
Conclusive: One’s faith is God’s final word.
Exclusive: No other belief system is valid or, as often implied and sometimes stated, even respectable.
Separative: All beliefs and practices not conforming to God’s word must be shunned and condemned.
Competitive: Different faiths are in a perpetual mutual competition as a means of salvation.
The author is a retired Army Cdr, one of the top 6 in the hierarchy. Hard to fathom this post retirement empathy on such a silly issue when he was in a position to change things. Did he? Nopes. Why does all this gyan and enlightenment boil to the surface post retirement in the top brass? Let’s address this issue first and leave cases of insubordination to the organisation and the courts.
I’m sorry but I’d disagree with the claim that this dismissal reflects a ‘colonial mindset’.
Such narrow-mindedness belongs neither in politics, nor in the armed forces. The officer’s misconduct lies not in his Christian faith (or someone’s hypothetical Muslim faith), but in the idea that religion, to them, is conclusive, exclusive, separative, and competitive (explained below). This view of religion underlies reactions like his, and it is precisely why the common all-faiths worship tradition of the military was anathema to, and ill behoves, an officer.
(Explanations of terms)
Conclusive: One’s faith is God’s final word.
Exclusive: No other belief system is valid or, as often implied and sometimes stated, even respectable.
Separative: All beliefs and practices not conforming to God’s word must be shunned and condemned.
Competitive: Different faiths are in a perpetual mutual competition as a means of salvation.