English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Surgical strike overhyped, bad to politicise military operations: General who oversaw operation

Published

on

Surgical strike overhyped, bad to politicise military operations: General who oversaw operation

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]While Prime Minister Narendra Modi, his party and other ardent followers have never stopped taking credit for PM’s boldness and bravery for the surgical strikes Indian troops carried out on terror launch pads across the Line of Control in the wake of the Uri attack in 2016, a retired army officer who oversaw the operation has criticised the hype and the attempt to gain political mileage out of it.

Lt General (retired) DS Hooda, who was the Northern Army Commander in September 2016 and oversaw the Indian army’s surgical strikes, said too much of hype over the operation did not help and it is not good when army operations get politicised, reported The India Express (IE).

According to a report in The Hindustan Times, he said: “The military leadership must guard against becoming a tool in the hands of politicians. We can’t take military action to suit someone politically.” He added that though the action needed publicity to boost soldiers’ morale, the excess hype and political one-upmanship around it was uncalled for.

The veteran was moderating a session on the “Role of cross-border operations and surgical strikes” on Day 1 of the Military Literature Festival organised by the Punjab government at Lake Club in Chandigarh on Friday.

Hooda said following the surgical strikes, there were accusations that the issue had been politicised, that there was an “attempt to keep a purely military operation in the political domain by selective leaks of videos, photographs etc”.

“Did the overhype help? I say, completely no. If you start having political resonance in military operations, it is not good. There was too much political banter, on both sides, and when military operations get politicised, that is not good,” he said. On the possibility of the strikes impacting the thought process of decision-makers in future operations, the former Army Commander said “if you hype a successful operation, then even success has its burden”.

“Will we think next time (what) if there are casualties? Because it has been so overhyped, will it impose caution on leadership? What happens if it does not have the same level of success? It may impose some caution in future. If we had done it quietly, it would have been much better,” he said.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1544274175251{border-top-width: 10px !important;border-right-width: 10px !important;border-bottom-width: 10px !important;border-left-width: 10px !important;padding-top: 10px !important;padding-right: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 10px !important;padding-left: 10px !important;background-color: #bcbcbc !important;border-radius: 10px !important;}”]Army Chief General Bipin Rawat on Saturday said that he respects the view of Lt General DS Hooda (retd) on surgical strikes being over hyped as Hooda was a part of the operation.

“These are individual person’s perceptions so let’s not comment on them. He was one of the main persons involved in conduct of these operations so I respect his words very much,” said Rawat.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Responding to remarks from panelists that the strikes were purely tactical in nature with short-term goals and of no strategic value to deter the Pakistan Army from backing future terror attacks, Hooda said: “When we were planning it, there was no thought in our mind that Pakistan will stop doing Uri-like incidents. At least in the Northern Command, there was simplicity of purpose. For us, it was very simple,” he said.

He said ever since 2013-end, terrorists had been coming from across the LoC to attack Army installations in Samba, Hiranagar, Janglote, Pathankot and Uri. “Since July 2016, Army had been under pressure due to protests following (militant commander) Burhan Wani’s death. The Chief of Army Staff flew in and we went to Uri. We walked in three-inch-deep ashes of the camp which had been attacked. There was no doubt in our mind that we had to do something and we had to hit Pakistan camps across the LoC. You may call it revenge but in our mind, this had to be done,” he said.

The aim of the strikes, he said, could not have been fulfilled through artillery fire. “We had had massive artillery duels but it was not helping. Planning had been going on in advance. We pulled out our old plans, refurbished them a bit and sent the Special Forces across. Should it have been publicised? There was no option. Too many questions were being asked. The media and our own Army soldiers were asking, ‘what are we doing about so many deaths of soldiers’,” he said.

He said following the surgical strikes, the Army noted a “fair amount of panic” on the Pakistani side. “Their leaves were cancelled. We caught their chatter on radio. There was talk that we might repeat it in some area. There was fair amount of shock on their part as to how have these guys come in and done this operation. This did impose caution on them in some limited sense,” he said.

Responding to a question from the audience, Hooda said in hindsight, it would have been better had the strikes been done secretly.

He also added that it was not that the directions to carry strike came from the political bosses. “It was purely a military decision,” he added.

“It was natural to have initial euphoria about the success but the constant maintenance of hype around the military operations was unwarranted. It should have been kept quiet,” Hooda concluded.

Some of the noted veterans who were part of the panel discussion, also questioned the publicity given to the surgical strike saying that glorification of the military operation was unwarranted, as it could not serve any major tactical or strategic purpose.

Other officers agreed with Gen Hooda

Veterans were also of the view that the much touted surgical strikes had failed to deter Pakistan, which was continuously infiltrating on Indian soil even after that.

Noted military veteran, Lt Gen NS Brar (retd), who had also served as member of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), even cautioned the Centre asking, “Whether the political head would have owned the responsibility had there been causalities in the surgical strike.” He said that it was difficult to assume that the September 2016 strikes forced the Pakistan to change or review their policy.

Gen Brar added that in future there was need to have long term impact on the enemy while conducting such operation. He gave an example of air strikes carried out by Israel in 1981, on Iraq’s nuclear sites causing huge damage.

Former Deputy Chief of the Army Staff (DCAS) Lt Gen JS Cheema (retd) said that it was too simplistic to assume that Pakistan would rethink its course of action against India after the much advertised surgical strikes. He, however, said that the operation was successful and had boosted the morale of troops.

Another noted veteran and an expert on defence and strategic issues, Col Ajay Shukla (retd) said that there was nothing new in the surgical strike, as this is a way of life for the troops at the Line of Control. He added that the excessive publicity of the September 2016 strikes, which had in fact been a reactionary strike conducted after the Pathankot and Uri attacks, had set a dangerous benchmark for the Indian political dispensation, which they would find difficult to maintain in the eventuality of future terror attacks.

“Success has its burden, Pakistan had in fact been emboldened by the strikes as they knew now that the Indian government would be always be under immense pressure to strike across the border after each terror attack,” Col Shukla added.

The event was attended by Punjab governor VP Singh Badnore and former Army chief, General VP Malik amongst a battery of former generals and Army commanders.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Renaming MGNREGA removes core spirit of rural employment law, says Shashi Tharoor

Published

on

Shashi Tharoor

Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has strongly criticised the renaming of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), saying the move strips the rural employment programme of its core essence. His remarks came after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, also referred to as the VB-G RAM G Bill.

Speaking to media, Tharoor said the decision to remove Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the scheme “takes out the heart” of the rural employment programme that has been in place for years. He noted that the identity and philosophy associated with Mahatma Gandhi were central to the original law.

Tharoor also objected to the way the new name was framed, arguing that it unnecessarily combined multiple languages. He pointed out that the Constitution envisages the use of one language in legislation, while the Bill’s title mixes English and Hindi terms such as “Guarantee”, “Rozgar” and “Ajeevika”, along with the conjunction “and”.

‘Disrespect to both names’

The Congress leader said that inserting the word “Ram” while dropping Mahatma Gandhi’s name amounted to disrespecting both. Referring to Mahatma Gandhi’s ideas, Tharoor said that for Gandhi, the concepts of Gram Swaraj and Ram Rajya were inseparable, and removing his name from a rural employment law went against that vision.

He added that the name of Lord Ram could be used in many contexts, but questioned the rationale behind excluding Mahatma Gandhi from a programme closely linked to his philosophy of village self-rule.

Protests over passage of the Bill

The VB-G RAM G Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on December 18 and cleared by the Rajya Sabha in the early hours of December 19 amid protests from Opposition members. Several MPs opposed the manner in which the legislation was pushed through, with scenes of sloganeering and tearing of papers in the House.

Outside Parliament, members of the Trinamool Congress staged a sit-in protest near Samvidhan Sadan against the passage of the Bill. Congress also announced nationwide protests earlier this week, accusing the government of weakening rights-based welfare schemes.

Despite opposition criticism, the government has maintained that the new law will strengthen rural employment and livelihood security. The Bill raises the guaranteed employment from 100 days to 125 days per rural household and outlines a 60:40 cost-sharing formula between the Centre and states, with a higher central share for northeastern, Himalayan states and certain Union Territories.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi attacks G RAM G bill, says move against villages and states

Rahul Gandhi has criticised the G RAM G bill cleared by Parliament, alleging it dilutes the rights-based structure of MGNREGA and centralises control over rural employment.

Published

on

Rahul Gandhi

Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi has launched a sharp attack on the Modi government after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Employment and Livelihood Mission (Rural) Bill, commonly referred to as the ‘G RAM G’ bill. He described the proposed law as “anti-state” and “anti-village”, arguing that it weakens the core spirit of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

The new legislation, which is positioned as an updated version of MGNREGA, was passed amid protests by opposition parties and is expected to replace the existing scheme once it receives presidential assent.

‘Bulldozed without scrutiny’, says Rahul Gandhi

Rahul Gandhi criticised the manner in which the bill was cleared, saying it was pushed through Parliament without adequate debate or examination. He pointed out that the opposition’s demand to refer the bill to a standing committee was rejected.

According to him, any law that fundamentally alters the rural employment framework and affects crores of workers should undergo detailed scrutiny, expert consultation and public hearings before approval.

Claim of dilution of rights-based guarantee

Targeting the central government, the Congress leader said the proposed law dismantles the rights-based and demand-driven nature of MGNREGA and replaces it with a rationed system controlled from Delhi. He argued that this shift undermines the autonomy of states and villages.

Rahul Gandhi alleged that the intent behind the move is to centralise power and weaken labour, particularly impacting rural communities such as Dalits, OBCs and Adivasis.

Defence of MGNREGA’s impact

Highlighting the role of MGNREGA, Gandhi said the scheme provided rural workers with bargaining power, reduced distress migration and improved wages and working conditions, while also contributing to rural infrastructure development.

He also recalled the role of MGNREGA during the Covid period, stating that it prevented crores of people from slipping into hunger and debt. According to him, any rationing of a jobs programme first affects women, landless workers and the poorest communities.

Opposition to name change and provisions

The Congress has also objected to the renaming of the scheme, accusing the government of attempting to erase the legacy associated with Mahatma Gandhi. Opposition MPs staged a dharna within the Parliament complex, questioning provisions of the bill that they claim dilute the “soul and spirit” of the original law enacted in 2005.

Under MGNREGA, the government guaranteed 100 days of work in rural areas along with an unemployment allowance if work was not provided. The ‘G RAM G’ bill proposes to raise the guaranteed workdays to 125, while retaining other provisions. However, critics have flagged concerns over employment being linked to pre-approved plans.

The bill was cleared after a midnight voice vote in the Rajya Sabha, following its passage in the Lok Sabha amid protests and walkouts. It will become law once approved by the President.

Continue Reading

India News

AAP dominates Punjab zila parishad polls, leads in most panchayat samiti zones

AAP has won 201 out of 317 declared zila parishad zones in Punjab so far and is leading in a majority of panchayat samiti seats, with counting still underway.

Published

on

Punjab Zila Parishad Polls

The ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has recorded a strong performance in the Punjab zila parishad elections and is leading in the majority of panchayat samiti zones, as per results declared so far on Thursday. The counting process is still underway and complete results are awaited, officials said.

Polling for the rural local bodies was held on December 14 to elect representatives across 347 zones of 22 zila parishads and 2,838 zones of 153 panchayat samitis in the state.

AAP secures clear edge in zila parishads

According to the available results, outcomes have been declared for 317 zila parishad zones so far. Of these, the AAP has won 201 zones, placing it well ahead of other parties.

The Congress emerged second with victories in 60 zones, followed by the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) with 39 zones. The BJP won four zones, the BSP secured three, while independents claimed 10 zones.

District-wise data shows that the AAP won 22 zones in Hoshiarpur, 19 each in Amritsar and Patiala, 17 each in Tarn Taran and Gurdaspur, and 15 zones in Sangrur. The Congress registered its best performances in Gurdaspur and Ludhiana with eight zones each, followed by Jalandhar with seven zones. The SAD performed strongly in Bathinda with 13 zones, while the BJP managed to win four zones in Pathankot.

AAP leads in panchayat samiti results

In the panchayat samiti elections, trends declared so far indicate that the AAP is leading in a majority of zones. However, officials clarified that counting is ongoing and the final picture will be clear only after all ballot papers are tallied.

Kejriwal, Mann reject opposition allegations

Reacting to the trends, AAP supremo Arvind Kejriwal said the party’s performance reflected strong rural support for the Bhagwant Mann government’s work. Addressing the media in Mohali along with Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, Kejriwal dismissed allegations of irregularities raised by opposition parties.

He said the elections were conducted in a fair and free manner and claimed that the results so far showed a clear wave in favour of the AAP in rural Punjab. Kejriwal stated that nearly 70 per cent of the zila parishad and panchayat samiti seats had gone in favour of the party.

Congress, SAD question poll conduct

The Congress and the Shiromani Akali Dal, however, accused the ruling party of misusing official machinery. Punjab Congress chief Amrinder Singh Raja Warring alleged that the AAP had “stolen” the rural mandate and claimed that the results did not reflect genuine public support.

Opposition parties had earlier also accused the AAP government of high-handedness during the polling process, allegations that the ruling party has strongly denied.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com