Agnipath is in keeping with India’s military transformation The Sunday Guardian 28 Jul 2024 Maj Gen Harsha Kakar
Agnipath is in keeping with Indian Military’s Transformation
Agnipath is in keeping with India’s military transformation The Sunday Guardian 28 Jul 2024
The debate on Agniveers, including its intent of reducing the pension bill is facing flak. But that is not the only reason for its introduction. The armed forces, in recent years, have been plagued by excessive low medical category cases, impacting operational efficiency, especially within the army. Added is the need to reduce age profile of soldiers. These together form the background for the scheme. There are also other national benefits.
On pensions, critics have questioned the cost of national security. Admiral Arun Prakash had earlier commented, ‘Economics (must) take a back seat to national security.’ He subsequently wrote in the Indian Express, ‘One presumes that the Agnipath scheme, launched with much fanfare, is an outcome of this demand (reduce the pension bill).’
General Ashok Shivane mentions, ‘The initial tour of duty to Agniveer saw the anti-pension lobby disguised in the call for a younger and more tech-savvy profile calling the shots.’ Shivane also mentions that the armed forces have 2.4 pensioners for every serving soldier, while for civilian employees it is 1:1.
Shivane rightly adds that the per capita pension for defence employees is lower than that of its civilian counterparts. The armed forces are the only government organization not on the National Pension Scheme as most of its members retire early.
The impact of pensions on the defence budget is evident when its breakdown in percentages is assessed. For the current financial year 2024-25 the breakdown of the defence budget caters 27.66% for capital expenditure; 14.82% for revenue sustenance and operational preparedness; 30.66% for pay and allowances; 22.70% for defence pensions and 4.17% for civil organizations under MoD.
The pension bill will only increase with time, which is why the government seeks to contain it. On pensions, Bernie Sanders, a US Senator, had stated, ‘If you can’t afford to take care of your veterans, then don’t go to war. We have a moral obligation to support them.’
Some have suggested that pension allocations be removed from the defence budget, thereby giving a true picture of defence expenditure. At the end of the day, pensions will have to be paid, no matter under which head. They cannot be wished away.
There is no doubt that national security is essential and the primary responsibility of any government. National defence is just one part of it. Development and social welfare are equally important responsibilities. India has a limited pie. The same has to be utilized for national defence, infrastructure development, social upliftment and many more heads. Prioritizing one above the other is only possible to some extent. Thus, there will always be a limitation on allocations for national defence.
Late President Abdul Kalam had mentioned in his address to passing out cadets at the Indian Military Academy in Dec 2006, ‘National security is born out of two important components. One is the economic growth and prosperity; second one is the capability to defend the nation against all types of threats. National development and national security have to go together.’ Hence, one cannot be ignored at the cost of the other.
Those who seek to raise service of Agniveers from the current four to 7/10 years miss a factor. The Supreme Court, in 2019, granted benefits in medical (ECHS) and canteen facilities to Short Service Officers, with some restrictions, even if they exit after five years. This resulted in additional funds being infused to maintain these institutions.
This possibly guided the government in announcing a four-year contract period for Agniveers. Can the government continue investing funding in these institutions once numbers dependent on them increase manifold with the induction of Agniveers and their families is debatable. Alternatively, should there be a via-media.
Few have commented that reduced training periods have impacted capabilities of Agniveers. This may not be true, as ground reports indicate otherwise. Further, those at the helm are aware of what they are doing. The earlier methodology and duration of training have been suitably amalgamated to achieve similar standards. On job training continues wherever the Agniveer joins.
The first batch of Agniveers still have two years to go. Central police forces were the first to confirm 10% reservation for them, others would follow. There would always be concerns till their resettlement happens.
There are also other serious shortcomings within the scheme, especially involving technical organizations or services, where it takes years to gain proficiency. In such cases, four years may need to be reconsidered.
The Agnipath scheme is one of the transformations that the forces are undergoing. The CDS is in place and theatre commands around the corner. Cantonment boards are being scrapped, replaced by joint military stations. Infrastructure development along northern borders is being undertaken as also is aatmanirbharta. Capability and capacity building is being given impetus.
Technology is being inducted at every level. Simultaneous is ‘right sizing’ as against ‘downsizing.’ However, what is not flowing from the government is sufficient funds for modernization, in keeping with increasing threats. A defence budget under 2% of the GDP is below satisfactory levels.
All demands of the forces cannot be met ignoring other sectors, nor can the government ignore the armed forces. India cannot be Pakistan, which in one year increases its defence budget by 15%, as Rawalpindi controls Islamabad. Nor can it be the US or China whose economy permits a far higher defence expenditure. There has to be give and take.
The Agnipath scheme was intended to reduce a few anomalies, increasing pensions, age profile, especially of the army, as also growing numbers of low medical categories. However, its basic flaw was that it adopted the philosophy of ‘one-size-fits-all.’ Sensing an opportunity, the political environment blew its shortcomings out of proportion by playing on sentiments of the youth.
The current military leadership is undertaking a 360-degree review of the scheme. Options to overcome its drawbacks as also meet operational requirements are under consideration. The top leadership is capable and knows what is best in present circumstances. They do not need unsolicited advice. Tweaking of the scheme to overcome current shortfalls is possible.
What is important is that the government listens to their suggestions with an open mind. Finally, no single organization has sole responsibility for national security. It is a team effort and must remain so.