My relationship with my army

 I seem to have a love-hate relationship with the army.
On second thoughts, that's not the right explanation. That's what happens when you try to explain a complex relationship in just a sentence.
I surely love the army, but I definitely do not hate it. However, there is something negative in it, in my perception.
Let's take the love part first.
Whenever I am in a an army environment, I seem to be having the best part of my life. That's love isn't it? I am at ease in an army environment. Interacting with army officers, and more-so soldiers, seem to boost up my whole being. Something is very good about it.
If I try to analyse it ( which is not a good exercise at all), I feel very good vibes in an army atmosphere.
Now let's take the aspects that affect me negatively.
I don't find any emphasis on efficiency. For an organisation that sends people to their death missions, a non-emphasis on efficiency seems highly irresponsible to me. The systems, the people are reasonably well intentioned but not efficient at all. The sections, the platoons, the companies, the bns - at every level, they simply could be about 300% better.
The worst part is that no one is bothered about this sheer waste.
Sometimes I think that too much emphasis on efficiency would kill the warm feelings in the army? Could be. But only if it is overdone, as probably was in the US army during the Vietnam war. But one doesn't have to overdo it.
Just get more efficient, without killing off the cohesiveness of the army. Can be done.
With that, I can now describe my relationship with the army much better. I think I love the army, but I do not respect it too much.
And personally, I'd much rather be respected than loved.

Why I just don't fit in anywhere

I am on my way to quit the Whatsapp group of my NDA coursemates. Quite normal with me. I just don't fit in in any group in which others so easily blend in.

I just can't be a nobody. I MUST have a voice. That seems to contradict my self-belief that I don't need anyone's approval and I have no desires.Then why do I insist on having a voice in a group?

I am not sure but let me attempt a theoretical explanation.

It could be that while I seem to be quite desireless, I feel that if that be so, why be part of a group? One joins a group because one resonates with the main focus of the group. So, to be part of it and still not partake in its activities makes no sense. If one finds the activities abhorrent to ones basic nature, why stick on? Why not get out and roam free?

Within a group, I create waves not just ripples. No one likes it and, quite naturally, protest. But creating waves is my nature. If I believe in some thing, I must say so. And I believe in extreme positions. Middle of the road in not where I walk.  Too much traffic in the middle of the road. By definition there are too many average guys walking there. I am not an average guy. I won't budge an inch just to make it palatable or practical.

It seems that this disenchantment with popularity stems from my basic nature of worshipping the tramp model of life. That being so, it is no surprise  that I just don't blend it. Quite content to go along the lone path humming 'मैं और मेरी आवारगी' (  I and my being a tramp)

फिरते हैं कब से दर ब दर, अब इस नगर अब उस नगर, एक दूसरे के हम सफर, मैं और मेरी आवारगी,
न आशना हर रहगुज़र, न मेहरबान सब की नज़र, जाएँ तो अब जाएँ किधर, मैं और मेरी आवारगी

Aimless wandering - the ultimate of life. You're free not when you don't have a need of anyone. You're free when no one has a need for you.

Is it intense turmoil masquerading as serenity or the other way round? Don't know.

I really don't fit in anywhere but I do know that am quite happy not fitting in.

But one thing seems clear to me. Whatever comes naturally to me must be followed, not eschewed. After all - I am all I have.

The Haryana incident has shaken up even me

I always felt that I know India's sore points and hence it is quite impossible to shock me with any one event of India that shows her in bad light. But the Haryana incident has proved me wrong. India is possible of murkier events than even I give her (dis)credit for.

A community in Haryana claim their right to reservations in jobs for at least a year and half ---- and no one cares. Then they protest for 4 days and still no one cares. Then things go wrong and violence starts. City after city burns. Trains are stopped on main routes and road traffic is blocked completely. Al this is happens not in a remote corner of North East, but just next to the capital of India, in one of its's most prosperous states. Then curfew is imposed with order that no more than 5 guys can get together and police deploys itself to enforce that order. But all one sees is thousand of protesters swarming around the policemen, who are out to enforce a 'no more than 5 at a time' rule. No one seems unduly perturbed about the rule of law or the lack of it. This much even I would condone in India. As I said, I know her only too well.

Then it explodes. The army is called in. They too deploy but to no great effect. For moving into some areas, the army has to move in by helicopters. Even the army can't move on Indian roads Wow.
Violence erupts. 18 killed, more than a hundred injured, On TV screen, one sees huge cauldrons of fire, taking in vehicles, markets and banks. To my military mind, it looks as if someone has unleashed an incendiary attack on Haryana.

I thought now the representatives of these people, the MLAs. would be seen in their constituencies, pleading with people who voted them in, to stop this and burn the next house 'over their dead bodies'. Why did I think so? Probably influenced by reading in history as to how one frail old man, Mahatma Gandhi, not even an elected representative of Indian people,  stopped the Nohakhali riots single-handedly by moving through people in their madness. What else are leaders meant for? On those days, the India PM was giving political minded speeches in BHU Varanasi, instead of roaming the streets of Haryana.

The protester stop water to neighbouring city - which happens to be India's a capital. India's capital has water left only for a few hours more, at rationed scale. If nothing done, foreign embassies would have to use the diplomatic bag to get water from home country.
Unable to control things, the government gives in. They announce that the demands of protesters will be met. Just beats anyone that if demands were just enough to be met, why then the mayhem?But India never gives answers. It just amazes you.
But the best, or worse, was still to come. It comes to light that on one of the days, vehicles were stopped on road, women dragged out and raped in sight of the family members. Jeans and inner wear of women are seen strewn around and eyewitness say that they saw women dragged in bushes and then -----. But no complainants, which is easily explainable. When Indian police could not protect a high visibility accused ( Kanhaiya of JNU), forewarned and forearmed, INSIDE the sanctum sanctorum of Indian justice, the Supreme Court, only a foolish woman will come forth to give evidence in India. No one want to be raped twice.
No great resentment in India. No government toppled. As for the PM and Home minister, I wonder if they even gave it 10 minutes of their time.
Is India Africa? No. Africa is much more civilized and their elected representative more accountable.
Has this never happened in India before? Yes, worse things have happened. So, why am I so amazed?
Because we have a right to expect that things will get better by each year, not worse. We shouldn't measure civilization with reference to the depravity of yesterday. And also look at the political power structure in this case. The same party rules Haryana and the Centre. The party in power has 282 MPs on it own and close to 330 in the NDA alliance. Such power and also such lack of power!
Yes, India never ceases to amaze me. The bigger problem is that being in such depths of civilization does not bother most Indians. They are quite happy. If you don't even know you are sick, how will you get treated?
The easy acceptance by most of us of such a hellhole, is what shocks even a cynic like me.
Great place, great guys.

Too many martyrs is not a good sign for the army

Praveen Swami, a journalist,  has written well in 'A deep malaise' ( Indian Express - 25 Feb16). However, he has restricted his comments mainly on the shortcomings of the police and para-military forces. I take up here the hallowed territory - Indian army itself. I start by saluting the bravery and commitment of the officers and soldiers and bowing deep to the martyrs. But it is clear to me that they could be better equipped and trained for these ops. We need victories, preferably without martyr.  A CO should almost NEVER have to lead such ops unless caught in an ambush, as happened with Col NJC Nair, AC in 1993 in Nagaland. But today I find too many CO level officers dying, leading ops that should be lead by JCOs. Am not impressed by the line 'our leaders lead from the front'. Leading a unit is not being the pointsman in an assault team. What are the compulsions which force COs to become pointsmen? The only compulsion that comes to mind is that the men will move ONLY if an officer is at the head, even if the subunit is a section (which should have just a havilder at its head).

Just too many well trained regular soldiers dying in own land, to winkle out poorly trained and equipped terrorists, holed up alone in enemy territory (can't compare the time and equipment cost of an Indian army soldier/officer to those of a terrorist).

Our men just do not have the best possible equipment that even today's India can afford to give them a fighting chance to come out alive in a fire-fight. Even our Special Forces do not seem to be having equipment to hear through walls, peep through corners and see through dark and dust. 

And please don't tell me that the guy who has the initiative always has the upper hand. I know that. I also know that when the terrorist strikes first, he has the initiative. But when he is holed up and expects assault on himself from any window, any door, or maybe even the roof, at any time, it is the security forces that the initiative. 

Definitely, the training and equipment of our soldiers, our doctrines and above all, the spine of some of our senior officers to stand up against pressure needs vast improvements. Military history tells me of a great General who once lamented, 'Don't use my men where you should use artillery'. Why aren't the generals of today speaking up? 

If you'll not risk even your career for your men, should they be risking their lives for you?

I end with saluting the bravery and commitment of our martyrs. 

Hunger in the soul? - I just don't have it

Just saw Rocky 3 ( or Rocky 4). In a scene, a training instructor boxer tells Rocky 'You don't display hunger. Eye of the tiger.'
It struck me that this explained me to myself. I simply don't have any hunger.
When I was a 2 Lt doing the Commando course at Belgaum, my instructor in UAC (unarmed combat) told me 'Alok, you are good, but you don't seem hungry enough to beat your opponent'. I was told the same thing by my boxing instructor too.
Now that I think back, they must have been right. I am just not hungry enough. No desire to beat anyone, no desire to get complimented. What is worse - no desire to excel. Just want to be left alone, doing my thing.
Accomplishment means nothing to me.
In my career, I could please no boss. Not even one. And professionally, I was pretty good.
What to say of bosses, I have no desire to please even myself.

The new personal Azadi

Which system of government is best - monarchy, dictatorship or democracy? None of these. In particular, the concept that azadi (independence) means getting rid of the foreigner from the government is plain BS. Has removal of British from India been good for the common man? Absolutely not. As I heard several times from my father and grandfather, the common man was far happier under the British than he is now. Is there another benchmark for a good government than  happiness of the common man? Colour of skin, or stamp on passport? Nah!
In this era of enlightened citizenship, RTI and PIL, independence no longer means getting rid of the foreigner. It means getting rid of everyone who wants to get unfettered control over your life. Merely changing a foreigner for a fellow Indian is no solution. Treat no one as your master. Challenge every wrong done to you. Some years back, it was not possible. But now the global and national environment has changed and it is possible. If not, make it possible. That would be the war of independence.
It is in this connection that the recent victory of the young lady (Ms S Singal)  who challenged the legal validity of IT Sec 66A in the Supreme Court and won it, becomes important. She proved that 540 odd parliamentarians of India (since 2008, when this law was enacted), President of India and hundreds of legal eagles/babus of the IT and law ministry had all been pushing an illegal provision. These guys are neither knowledgeable nor well intentioned.
Anyone who treats politics as a full time career just can not be a sensible human being. A sensible guy spends time with family and personal interests, not with his voters. If the guy is more keen to be with you than he is with his wife/husband/children or his guitar/TV/cooking, he obviously has something to gain from this hard work. When I heard of how Narendra Modi was rushing from one political meeting to another before the last elections, I wondered - 'What's wrong with this man? What's his angle?'. Then it struck me that his angle was power and/or money - whether for himself or his party
The days of nationalists like Mahatma Gandhi are over. The motivations of these guys are purely selfish. In any case, Mahatma Gandhi was a very relaxed man, with all the time for his ashram  his wife and his goat.
When I was kid, I read it some where, 'If I hear of someone coming solely to help me, I'll flee immediately.'
No man is good enough to rule over another man.
Question every move of the these kings - PM, CM, DM, SP etc. Whenever their decisions don't suit you, take them to court. Be your own master. Actually, you ARE king. Indian constitution starts with preamble, 'We, the people of India, give to ourselves -----this constitution-', not 'Lord Rama/Krishna/Mr XYZ gives to the people of India -----'. No one gives it to you. It is yours to start with.
We are kings. Since we are busy with our work, we appoint these guys to sit somewhere and legislate on our behalf. For their work , we pay them through our tax money.
Fight for your kingdom alone. Don't make groups and expect others to fight for you. That's what the initial idea of political parties was. The moment another person joins your cause, he'll add his interests to it, diluting yours.
That is AZADI. Very personal. It is nothing to do with forms of government but with declaring your commitment towards your own life. Of course, the price has to be paid.
मुझे चाहिए आज़ादी  - ले के रहूंगा आज़ादी ( I want freedom and I'll do whatever it takes to get it)

Exposing Kejriwal, praising Modi

Friends, Delhiites, countrymen, lend me your ears;

I come to expose Arvind Kejriwal, not to praise him.
The evil that men do lives after them; even a principled resignation
The good is oft interred with their bones;
So let it be with Arvind.

The noble Modi hath told you Arvind was a Bhagoda

If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And what is Bhagoda? Leaving an appointed position to the detriment of the people you were serving

And Modi has never done such a dishonorable thing

Not even when he ran away from the CMs post of Gujarat, to further his ambition

Or the MP election that he won in Vadodara, forcing another election expense 

Or BJP choosing not to form a government in Delhi despite the max MPs

That is not being a Bhagoda, but Arvind leaving after a good try is. Wow.

For Modi is an honorable man;
So are they all, all honorable men in BJP

Come I to speak on Arvind's next elections

He is no friend of mine; I don't know him

But Modi says he is ambitious;
And Modi is an honorable man.

As ambitious as deciding to fight from Varanasi seat, when Ghaziabad would surely have see him win

Did this in Arvind seem ambitious?
A diabetic went on 15 day fast, endangering his life many days

Slept on streets of Delhi in 4 degree centigrade

When that the poor have cried, Arvind hath wept
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Modi says he was ambitious; And Modi is an honourable man

I speak not to disprove what Modi spoke,

But here I am to speak what I do know.
You all did love Arvind once, not without cause:
What cause withholds you then, to doubt him now?
O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason. Bear with me;
My heart is with the muffler and the cough,
And I must pause till it come back to me.

O masters, if I were disposed to stir
Your hearts and minds to mutiny and rage,

Mutiny against removing secularism from India's constitution

Rage against appointing rapists as cabinet ministers, for women safety, I suppose

Mutiny against Muzaffarnagar type politics

Rage against giving Obama a chance to remind us of Article 25 of our own constitution
Mutiny against a SIT for the Sikh genocide in 84, not announced, just cunningly  deviously leaked ahead of polls

Mutiny against placing Ambani and Adani over  starving MNREGA labour, denied funds for 7 months now
Mutiny over attacking someone's गोत्र . Gawd, where are we headed?
Rage against placing photo-op session opportunities over grassroot level changes in public healthcare, education and corruption

Mutiny against the view that those who are not Ramzadaas are Haramzadaas

Rage against having us vote without giving us a commitment of manifesto

Just asking us to sign a blank cheque, so he may write what he wants on it, later

Rage against being placed under a CM who was not even a party member 30 days back

And now gagged; will she speak after 10 Feb?

Or will Hema Malini, CMs of state and PM of India come to rule Delhi

You are not wood, you are not stones, but thinking men and women;

And, being men and women, bearing the legacy of Arvind,
It will inflame you, it will make you mad:
Will you be patient? Will you stay awhile? Have a coffee, please

I have overshot myself to tell you of it:

Kind souls, what, weep you when you but behold

Our Arvind's vesture wounded? Look you here,

Here is himself, marred, as you see, with traitors.

Good friends, sweet friends, let me not stir you up

To such a sudden flood of mutiny.
They that have done this deed are honorable:

Yet hear me, countrymen; yet hear me speak.

Here is an Arvind! When comes such another?

Now let it work. Mischief, thou art afoot,

Take thou what course thou wilt!

--------------------------With profound apologies to Shakespeare, and Modi