Indian Generalship

Recent cases against some Indian army generals are becoming hot news suddenly. However, a slide of this magnitude never happens suddenly or by accident. Like many life threatening diseases, its symptoms surface every now and then but are either not noticed or are brushed under the carpet. Finally, they explode in our face.
The book 'Mask of command' explains how like warfare itself, generalship is a cultural enterprise, providing a key to understanding a particular era or place. John Keegan propounds the view of heroism in warfare as inextricably linked with the political imperative of the age and place. He demonstrates how the role of the general alters with the ethos of the society that creates him.
Indian generalship is only reflecting the political imperatives and societal ethos that commenced in 1947.
It started in 62 itself, where Gen Kaul was a nothing but a political stooge. We lost the war because of that but hid the Henderson Brooks enquiry report from public scrutiny. Thereafter, we had 1965 where the then Chief recommended cease fire to the PM on the basis that we had almost finished our ammo which was nowhere the case. After this came to light, no action was taken against anyone. 1971 did see a new era but operation Bluestar soon followed it. There we had the shameful incident of a General ordering his troops to attack machine gun posts barefooted, forbidden to fire in a certain direction. How he accepted such political interference in conduct and methodology of operations was never questioned by anyone. On the contrary, he went on to be army Chief in his time. Thereafter we had the operations in SriLanka which were run more by the High Commissioner ( Dixit ) than by the army generals. As a consequence, we saw ragtag band of LTTE men merrily attacking units of Indian army that boasted of golden jubilees and centenaries. The army still did not protest. That further emboldened the political masters which eventually led to the politically expedient but militarily expensive frontal assaults of Kargil.
Since that too was not contested by anyone, the moral decline began.
We are only seeing the coming of age of a disease that started long back when political imperatives and societal ethos changed in 1947. This decline is purely of swadeshi ( home grown )origins, a sad but inevitable effect of Indianism.