As Defence Minister, George Fernandes had passed an order making it mandatory for ministry officials to spend a week in Siachen before making decisions.
George Fernandes, the firebrand trade unionist and former Defence Minister of India, passed away at the age of 88 Tuesday after a long illness. This interview was conducted by Shekhar Gupta (SG) for NDTV’s Walk the Talk programme in June 2003, when Fernandes was India’s Defence Minister under Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s NDA government, at the Siachen Glacier in Jammu and Kashmir.
SG: Hello and welcome to a very special edition of Walk the Talk. This is Siachen Glacier, the highest battlefield in the world. It is also perhaps, not perhaps, certainly the most hotly contested real estate anywhere. It is nearly 17,000 feet at Kumar Post — if a solider has to walk his talk anywhere, it has to be here. Indian soldiers have been doing it for a long time now. They been holding these features. The features you see behind me are the Saltoro Ridge, and the glacier in the middle. This is the pride of the Indian Army. This is where the Indian Army has seen Pakistani soldiers eye to eye. The Indian Army has come out better in that confrontation. It’s not just the soldiers who have done it heroically over many years, it takes a lot out of a human being to spend even three months on a post like this.
But one man who has left an imprint in this parts, he has been here 35 times, is George Fernandes. George, welcome to this very special programme.
SG: What is so special about Siachen, what keeps bringing you here?
Fernandes: Essentially, the men who are posted here… They are, as you very rightly observed, at a place where life is very, very difficult. On becoming Minister of Defence, I first came here and what I discovered was a broken snowmobile at the base camp. I asked the officer taking me around “What is this?” He said, “It’s a snowmobile.” I asked “What is it used for?” “To deliver whittles and other things which our men up there, anywhere up to 20,000 feet, may need.”
But I found it was a broken piece. So I asked the officer, “This is broken, how will you send the provisions?” He said, “We have some more. But most of them are in a bad shape. We have asked for new ones, but they have not yet come.”
So I asked him, “When you say you’ve asked for new ones, and they have not yet come, how long ago was it?”
He said, “It’s been over a year.”
So I became very angry, as I had seen a bit of the glacier, and known a lot about the glacier, as a Member of Parliament. A lot parents would come to me and say, “Please bring our son from there. You can do it.” And I never agreed to do it, telling them that “you would like other people’s sons to be there”, and not yours, just because you have approached me. No, can’t be done.
So I knew what exactly Siachen was. But I felt miserable when I saw Siachen and the conditions in which soldiers lived here. Miserable, also because I used to be very harsh with those parents who used to come to my house and ask for my help in getting their sons home.
When I went back to Delhi after my visit here, one of the things I did was ask for the files. I discovered that files were moving from one table to another, perhaps in the same room.
SG: What, in the defence ministry, is called “putting the file in orbit”.
Fernandes: Yes, it was in orbit.
SG: So when you want to stall something, you put it in orbit?
Fernandes: Yes.
SG: That means put a roundabout noting, so that nobody can take a decision.
Fernandes: This one was literally moving from one table to the other, perhaps. Anyway, what I found was for a year and two months, nothing was happening. I sent for the officers and asked them why did they delayed this, and they had no answer. I passed the orders about procuring these immediately from wherever they are procured, and I also passed a very long order that any person who comes to the Ministry of Defence, if he has anything to do with the needs, requirements of the armed forces, he should spend one week at the Siachen Glacier, twice during his tenure. He should spend one week at the Rajasthan desert.
SG: See, that is the criticism sometimes. That Indian soldiers live in extreme conditions in places like Rann of Kutch, Ladakh, and Kargil. So, Siachen has become a symbol. The criticism is, are you doing it because Siachen is ‘sexy’, has more publicity value? We are shooting at Siachen, and not at Kutch, because Siachen is what people remember.
Fernandes: Fine, but my order is that during the summer months, height of the summer, you will be in the Rajasthan desert. Similarly, during the height of winter… (stumbles) Sorry, this happens here. It’s not flat land.
SG: This is tough for you to come, but if you’re doing it at your age, I’m less worried.
Fernandes: Well, I still feel young.
SG: Soldiers do it at a much younger age, but they give the prime years of their life here. For us, it’s a little interlude.
Fernandes: At the height of the monsoon, they should be in…
SG: In the Northeast?
Fernandes: No, Rann of Kutch.
SG: Because it gets flooded?
Fernandes: Yes, as I said, glacier, Rann of Kutch, Rajasthan desert, and anytime of the year, the Northeastern region.
SG: George, we have all heard the snow scooter story, we know they came. We also know you sent these officers, now you’re sending them routinely… It’s been, at one level, great publicity, at another level, I suppose a morale booster for the troops. But the fact is that even under you, the same ministry returned Rs 9,000 crore unspent last year. This was money that was allocated to buy equipment, to buy weaponry, to buy better clothing… Rs 9,000 crore could’ve changed the soldiers’ lives, and also given them much greater firepower.
Fernandes: You are absolutely right. Part of it is was earmarked for the AJT (Advanced Jet Trainer), part of it was earmarked for helicopters, part of it for submarines. And these purchases cannot be compressed in one year. You start at a particular time. The trials take place, you are not satisfied. There is something wrong. It goes back—whether it is Russia, or France or somewhere else. Then it comes back. And, then you have price negotiations.
SG: George, I know that is procedure. But the fact is, just as you can’t hurry these things, the requirements also cannot be postponed. We are standing at a helipad, which I am told is the highest helipad for twin-engine helicopters, at least the kinds we possess. These army units could have done with a more modern helicopters, with modern engines, with better capacity. Isn’t it criminal to delay that for whatever reason? Because these requirements have been there for many years.
Fernandes: It is not the ministry that is delaying this. It is not the Army that is delaying it.
SG: Who is delaying it?
Fernandes: The delay is the system itself. Because these are items, which take a long time in production. You place an order, and the other side takes time. For instance, we are facing a situation, where three frigates are to be produced by the Russians. The gun they fixed on it didn’t work. They should have come much before, at the beginning of the year…
SG: But George, if it takes so long for a weapons system to be produced in a factory, that process can only start after orders are placed. Can’t we do something to hasten our processes, so that the delays don’t take place? Now, AJT has gone on for more than a decade, a better helicopter… Almost every element of our armed forces is waiting for equipment that it asked for many years ago.
Fernandes: I’m afraid the AJT may have to wait for another two or five years because the Americans have said that British Aerospace, the manufacturers of that, are bribing people, including people in India. So, we’ll start another process. And this is how it has been. And it is not only about the AJT, it has happened innumerable times…
SG: But do you think they are actually bribing, or is it just an allegation?
Fernandes: As far as I know my ministry, I have never allowed anybody who is going to bribe anybody to enter that place.
SG: We saw a story that appeared in a British paper, on AJT and British Aerospace, which suggested that British Aerospace was bribing people. And it quoted heavily from Tehelka transcripts to make that point. Is that what’s bothering you, Tehelka revisiting you? Has that slowed down the processes?
Fernandes: No, Tehelka, they have quoted whatever that man spoke under whatever circumstances he has spoken it.
SG: That’s your own party’s treasurer.
Fernandes: Yes, maybe. That doesn’t make any difference.
SG: What circumstances are you referring to?
Fernandes: As far as he is concerned — he went on record to say that “whatever I spoke was not right. I was blabbering; I was under the influence of whatever”, and so on and so forth.
So if you quote what he has said under the influence of alcohol or because he thought that he was going to become a great big industrialist because these people, who are trying to make a monkey out of him, were telling him that they are coming with god knows how many million or billion dollars. You should also thereafter quote what he said subsequently.
SG: That’s true, but the fact is that you are saying that there are now allegations against the AJT as well. That’ll scare the system. People will get worried that this process will again slow down?
Fernandes: No, no, this is not only for the AJT, it has been happening over a period of time.
SG: Isn’t it your job as a minister to cut through this? Because you are someone who came with credibility. To what extent has Tehelka damaged it?
Fernandes: Tehelka has damaged it to the extent that there is hardly any official in the ministry who would like to put his signature on anything that is to be purchased. He would like to postpone it, he would like to put it off… Because he thinks that it is the best way for him to survive. He says it in so many words — ‘I do not want to be arraigned before any tribunal or any court’.
SG: So the decision is not taken in his tenure and the next man has to take it.
Fernandes: And the next man carries on (the same thing).
SG: So what kinds of systems are delayed because of this psychology? The major ones, like the AJT, the submarines?
Fernandes: The AJT has gone into that. The Scorpenes, for instance, a decision (had to be taken).
SG: The Scorpene is a French submarine, a smaller submarine.
Fernandes: That’s right. And the same kind of noises have been made about that. Helicopters, we’ve had to go through the same kind of experience there.
SG: But if the armed forces require it, isn’t it for the political leadership then to say “we don’t care. This is what we believe in. We’ll do it, we’ll face the consequences, even if there are scandals tomorrow if there are controversies”?
Fernandes: The court is not going to listen to that. And if a political activist or minister does it, the man who is his rival or opponent, he’s not going to accept that. It’s a terrible world.
SG: But it comes back to you because you used Bofors not just to damn the Rajiv government, but the Rajiv Gandhi dynasty. The guns have proven to be very good, but 17 years hence the controversy doesn’t die out — you and the NDA don’t let it die out. Anytime political temperatures go up we start looking for Quattrocchi (the alleged conduit in the deal). So isn’t it necessary then for the political system to now come clean and stop it? So when you come clean on Bofors, then you come clean on this.
Fernandes: Come clean on Bofors by prosecuting those who had taken the money. How else? Is that what you are suggesting?
SG: No, it works differently.
Fernandes: Because it is in court.
SG: The other side can then say that we can only stop when we come to power. We will prosecute everybody else who we think took the money. And then it becomes a vicious cycle.
Fernandes: Well if there’s a reason to prosecute, there should be prosecution, no matter who. That alone will finally cleanse the system. In our country, we don’t prosecute. We institute a case and let it die, or let the man whom the case is against die.
SG: George, all this is fine but don’t you feel like the political system needs a Ganga snan of sorts now? That both sides come together and say, “there was a problem with Bofors, 17 years have gone past. There was a problem with Tehelka, three years have gone past. The armed forces are suffering, let’s all come together and on an all-party basis set up some sort of mechanism”. It can be judicial, which then oversees the deals of wherever controversies are. Both sides are then bound by it. Because this way, no country that is facing a permanent hostile situation can manage its armed forces.
Fernandes: Well in the post-Kargil developments, the group of ministers that will set up at the end of the Kargil enquiry has actually more or less decided…
SG: But it will not work with a group of just your ministers. It has to work with you sitting across the table with the opposition. There has to be some sort of true give and take.
Fernandes: If it’s a give and take that is based on truth, which is based on integrity, then yes. But if it’s a situation where…
SG: It’s a political settlement…
Fernandes: If it’s a political settlement where you are a crook, I am a crook…
SG: No, not like that. But the fact is that with Bofors, Bhatnagar is no more, Rajiv Gandhi is no more, there are a couple of people left. How long is it going to take? Just the practicality of the Bofors prosecution. Well, the weapon system is proving so useful. Rajiv Gandhi has been punished, his party has been punished by the people of India, I think it might be necessary at some point to come to some kind of a truce.
Fernandes: As they say in Parliament in response to a question, that’s a matter of consideration.
SG: Given the fact that we have permanently hostile borders — we face the threat of war any time — isn’t it a possibility we should look at?
Fernandes: Well it’s worth examining. I can say only that much at the moment.
SG: But it takes two to clap.
Fernandes: Sure, it always takes two to clap, as long as the clapping is for something good.
SG: But George, I, as a taxpayer, resent this: The fact is that last year your government put a surcharge on my income, my hard-earned income, by saying we face threats on our borders, we need more money. On that surcharge, your govt collected Rs 5,000 crore. Then, by the end of the year, you returned Rs 9,000 crore and the CAG has noticed it. I just feel very cheated because, you know, I paid that money thinking that it’s going for the country’s defence, and you’ve returned twice as much.
Fernandes: No, it will go to the country’s defence — it won’t go anywhere else. Except that the items for which it was meant could not be purchased during the year for reasons that are obvious.
SG: Do you also see the possibility that if things go on, we’ve seen some peace moves on our side (the PM’s overture in Srinagar), do you see this process going forward now?
Fernandes: Yes, I do.
SG: Why do you think this climate has more juice or more steam than in the past?
Fernandes: For the reason that Pakistan, insofar as its economy is concerned, is in miserable condition. They must carry on with the money that the Americans pump in. Secondly, the initiative that the Prime Minister has taken had not just caught the imagination of the world, but people everywhere have supported this and it’s going to be rather tough for everyone.
SG: You’re not one to get pessimistic after General Musharraf’s recent statements
Fernandes: He makes these statements most of the time without knowing what he is speaking. Because in this Kargil statement, there are so many contradictions that one doesn’t know what to take and what to leave.
There’s one point that he has made, that there can be another Kargil. But another Kargil means he will have to take another beating. Another Kargil doesn’t mean that he is going to emerge as a great hero. On the contrary, he’ll take another beating, and he’ll take the lives of 1,000 of his men.
SG: There’s a problem with dictators in Pakistan because most of them don’t end up very well. The only way one could perhaps is by reaching some kind of peace with India because Pakistani dictators either fight a war against India and go into exile in disgrace, or they were deposed or killed or jailed by their successors. Is that something General Musharraf should remember?
Fernandes: Unfortunately, all those you named learnt it their own way. They didn’t learn it from what had happened to their predecessors. So, I do not know whether General Musharraf will think about this and take a positive approach to the issues that are presently on the agenda between India and Pakistan.
SG: But you still believe that this time, this process has more steam than Lahore or Agra?
Fernandes: Yes.
SG: And is it more because of an international situation, or because of Pakistan’s situation, or because we are more prepared this time for peace?
Fernandes: I think it’s a configuration of all these.
SG: You are less pessimistic or optimistic about this?
Fernandes: I am very optimistic. In all matters, I am optimistic. If I were not an optimistic person, I would not survive. I’m convinced that there is room for optimism here.
SG: We are then getting into a good situation. With China, things seem to be improving. With the Pakistanis, you say that this process has a little more steam. So you think this situation where our jawans — in Siachen and elsewhere — have lived in this constant state of hostility, eyeball-to-eyeball (will remain), or are you looking forward to this change? Or do you think this will go on for some time?
Fernandes: Well, it will all depend on what kind of peace we are able to get. If it’s peace where all the irritants are removed and it is compact, not of a lifetime… Then I believe Siachen cannot become a playground or summer sports ground, but Siachen can be something that binds a divided subcontinent.
SG: Well George, thank you very much. Let’s conclude on this optimistic note. Thank you. I won’t refer to your age but it’s an act of courage to come here in this climate.
Also read: ‘No worries, I am not pedigreed’: How I discovered the charming George Fernandes
(Transcribed by Simrin Sirur and Deeksha Bhardwaj)