Four years on, Agniveers future hangs in balance The Statesman 14 Jul 2026

https://epaper.thestatesman.com/4175030/Delhi-The-Statesman/14-07-2026

Four years on, Agniveers future hangs in balance The Statesman 14 Jul 2026

          The Agnipath scheme, launched in 2022, began the process of inducting its first batch of Agniveers at end of the same year, continuing into early 2023. They finish their service around end this year, after which they will be discharged with a Rs 11.71 lakh ‘Seva Nidhi’ package. The government has attempted to coordinate with central organizations as also states, to earmark vacancies for Agniveers, thereby ensuring that those seeking a second career, will get an opportunity.

25% of Agniveers, from those interested in rejoining the forces, would be recalled to enrol in the permanent cadre and be eligible for a minimum pensionable service of 15 years. How will the resettlement of the others pan out is to be seen. Success of the scheme would depend on those seeking a second career being provided an opportunity.

The government had multiple reasons for bringing about this scheme. These included reducing age profile of soldiers, which had risen to 32, bringing down the pension bill thereby enhancing funds for modernization, without impacting development and social welfare and releasing motivated, disciplined, fit and skilled individuals back into society while enabling youth from all corners of the country to join the forces. 

          The scheme had been criticized from the time it was announced. Many veterans believed that it would damage the spirit de corps and bonding within units as also create an armed force of conscripts. General Naravane, who was army chief when the scheme was introduced, is claimed to have written in his, yet to be published book, ‘Four Stars of Destiny,’ that the Agnipath scheme was thrust down the services and largely came as a surprise.

However, in an article published in The Hindu on 09 Nov 2022, apart from backing the scheme to the hilt, Naravane even refuted his own claim that the scheme came as a surprise. He mentions, in the article, that since its formulation phase, service chiefs discussed it with their foreign counterparts as also military delegations to evaluate reduced training methodologies and short service of soldiers in fighting formations, implying the armed forces were involved from the initial phases itself.

Backing the scheme he wrote, ‘(the scheme) will be of benefit to the nation, the Armed Forces and the individual.’ Further, on spirit de corps and bonding, he mentioned that it was upto the units to ensure the bond remains. The scheme has matured over the past four years with minute changes being made to suit the needs of the day.

Inputs flowing from the first few batches has been positive. Levels of technical knowledge has been high as has been the motivation and desire to excel. This is beneficial as nature of warfare becomes more dependent on technology. Reduction in training periods have had no impact on performance at ground levels as ‘on the job’ training continues. Now, when the first batch is close to finishing service and sufficient feedback is available, the forces are planning to seek a tweak to the retention system. The army and the air force are looking at enhancing retention rates to 50%, while the navy seeks 75%.

The difference between the forces proposals is largely dependent on peculiarities of the services. Naval operations are platform centric, which in itself are based on sophisticated systems covering multiple domains. Training on them takes time. Once an individual specializes, it is preferable to exploit his expertise. The air force is seeking larger retention in its technical trades. For the army it is a combination of enhancing retention levels in its technical trades as also maintaining continuity in non-technical units.  With increased retention levels, the blockage on recruitment from Nepal may also be lifted.

While basic training periods have been reduced, technical training cannot be. Thus, at the end of four years, an individual would be well into final stages of being able to independently handle select equipment, when his service concludes. Enhancing retention levels would benefit both, the individual as well as the organization, as availability of trainers for future batches would increase. Further, as recruitment into this scheme increases by the year, the percentage of Agniveers in a unit would also increase. By enhancing levels from now, the right ratio between experience and Agniveers could be maintained.

In matters concerning the armed forces there should never be sudden changes, especially in India, where forces are employed in a permanent ‘no-war, no-peace’ scenario alongside anti-terrorist operations. Change should be steady and modifications made, once current ones are absorbed. The forces have accepted the scheme, modified their systems and adapted accordingly. Enhancing retention would ensure continuity as also availability of trained manpower.  

The government has been aiming to sell the scheme to the youth of the country. On the contrary, opposition political parties have been working to discredit the scheme by claiming that it would leave trained youth unemployed. Some political parties have promised to scrap the scheme altogether. Currently, recruitment into the forces draws those unable to join Central Armed Police Forces, which is a reverse trend, mainly because the Agnipath service period is only four years. Earlier the best lined up for the armed forces. If the armed forces still seek to retain the edge, then two aspects become paramount. The first is re-settlement of those not retained in service and the second is enhancing retention levels to at least 50%.

With the first batch likely to complete its tenure by the end of the year, the time available for decision making is less. Any change in the proposal needs approval of the Cabinet Committee on Security (which approved the scheme), implying processing the proposal through various layers of the government. A positive approach to the proposal would, apart from boosting the confidence of those in service, also give a push to the scheme across the country. It would also reduce numbers needed to be absorbed by other government organizations, as also reduce criticism of the scheme.

With elections coming up early next year in states which contribute largest numbers to the armed forces, it appears that government has little choice. Turning down the demand would play into hands of the opposition, while supporting it would be a benefit. Most likely, enhanced retention will be accepted, not because the armed forces need it, but for political gains.