NEWS
ANALYSIS
SPECIALS
INTERVIEW
CAMPAIGN TRAIL
CONSTITUENCY
ISSUES
GALLERY
MANIFESTOS
OVERHEARD
INDIA SPEAKS!
COUNTDOWN
CHAT
PREVIOUS RESULTS
SCHEDULE
DISCUSSION GROUP

Army pleads again to be spared political mudslinging

Josy Joseph in New Delhi

The Indian Army on Thursday issued a strongly worded statement calling on politicians and the media not to drag it into "electoral politics in so vicious a manner" and denying allegations that it deliberately ignored warnings on the intrusions in Kargil.

"We have been constrained to issue the statement only because some people with vested interests have picked on a disgruntled brigadier who was removed from command of a brigade for operational reasons to another appointment, after due thought and recommendations of the chain of command - a type of action that often becomes necessary in a war," the statement said.

"The entire world acknowledges the apolitical and secular nature of our Armed Forces. We perform our task with equal commitment under different Governments, unmindful of the politics of the day. If we were now to be dragged into electoral politics in so vicious a manner, it will be a sad day for the country," Army Headquarters said.

"For its effective functioning, the Army relies heavily on its ethos, tradition, discipline and its chain of command. The Kargil war may have partly ended, but insecurity on the LoC, borders and within the country continues. We appeal to all countrymen, including media leaders, please do not destroy the fabric of the organisation which has always stood by the nation," it added.

The Army statement referred to recent reports in the weekly newsmagazine Outlook and some other newspapers which said Brigadier Surinder Singh had warned Army Headquarters of the enhanced threat and possibility of incursions in Kargil almost a year back.

Brigadier Singh, who was heading the 121 (independent) Brigade at Kargil, was transferred out during Operation Vijay.

Reports quoting letters apparently written by the brigadier claimed that he had been insisting on more assistance and better surveillance equipment, but none of it came his way.

"Insinuations and fabrications have been published quoting some Army documents completely out of context and some that do not even exist. It is therefore essential that the true facts must be stated," the army said in its detailed denial.

"It is reiterated that the only letter received by the COAS [chief of army staff], through his military assistant from Brigadier Surinder Singh, ex-cdr 121 (I) Infantry Brigade, is No. 29734/SS/Confd dated 28 June 99, after his removal from command of 121 (I) Inf Bde. In this letter he has attached several annexures of his correspondence with his Div HQrs [divisional headquarters - 3 Infantry Division headed by Major General V S Budhwar]. This letter with all its annexures has already been handed over to the Subrahmanyam Committee," the army said.

It added: "Some spokesmen and a [very] few journalists have given numbers with dates of several letters supposedly written by Brig Surinder Singh to the Chief of the Army Staff on dates between Aug 98 to (sic) Dec 98. The existence/receipt of these letters have been consistently denied by Army HQ/Ministry of Defence."

The Army said: "Is it just to quote and misquote the words of a disgruntled Brigadier to vilify the entire hierarchy of the Army, when inquiries into the matter are still underway?" The Army asked if it would have been "too much for us, uniformed men who swear by the honour of the profession of arms", to expect these publications to approach it for its version of the entire episode.

On the authenticity of the letters and media reports, the army said there is no letter, reported as HQ 121 Inf Bde letter No. Brief/COAS/124/GSD/VIF/DG dated 25 August 1998, received by the army chief's office. It maintained that the only letter it has received from Brig Singh is the one written after he was transferred out.

The army also said that in his briefings to the chief of the army staff , Brig Singh "made no mention of immediate or enhanced enemy threat to the places, ie Marpola, Mushkoh, Kaobali, Tololing, Kaksar, Bhimbat, Batalik and Yaldor, as mentioned in Outlook magazine dated 06 Sept 1999".

The army also claimed that letter No. brief/COAS/124/GSD/VIF/DG dated 25 August 1998, which too was widely reported in the media, is "either fabricated or doctored".

Similarly, the existence of three other letters purportedly written by the brigadier has been denied.

Tell us what you think of this report