Key Note address by Prof. Gautam Sen at Rajasthan University

On

“Societal and Security Concerns of the Armed Forces Personnel”

Introduction

Social Sciences as a discipline to provide inputs in policy orientation and policy formulation owes its legacy to two major intellectual “gharanas” of the Western world evolved in the post second world war period. The West European “gharana” and the North American “gharana”. The West European “gharana” shifted its unit of analysis from chronological historical methodology to historical analysis at temporal levels basing its unit of analysis on decision making for national interests. Thus the West European “gharana” has became deeply rooted in understanding the nuances of culture and civilizational preconditions – this despite the market forces acting unilaterally on all actions by government for governance. The North American “gharana” because of the impact of science and technology during the post second world war, the necessity to incorporate the weapons of mass destruction while formulating decision making for national interests plus the unavoidable passion to project itself as a world super power had to condition and make major changes of perceiving social sciences as a tool to provide methodology ensconced in empirical methods using mathematical means which obviously could not quantify culture or civilizational preconditions nor the issues of patriotism and nationalism. However, contrary to the diverse approach, one common factor i.e. the armed forces or military remained the prima Dona to project power and the intentions of the respective nation states, which came under each of these “gharanas”. The armed forces or the military remained rooted to tradition and culture and operated within the ambit of patriotism and nationalism.

The intellectual community in the Western Europe and North America were more than aware of the need to understand the military mind, which could not be contained or inferred by the sheer logic of empiricism. Morris Janowitz was perhaps one of the rare social psychologists who paid particular attention to analyze the Military Mind in the 20th Century. Two studies by him[2] “Sociology and the Military Establishment (New York, 1959)”, and “The Professional Soldier: A Social and Political Portrait (Glencoe, Ill., 1960)”, can be regarded as precursors. Similarly, Samuel Finer’s “ Man On A Horse Back: The Role of the Military In Politics (London, 1960)”still remains a classic and an essential reading in Military Sociology. Another significant contribution comes from Samuel P Huntington (ed.), “Changing Patterns of Military Politics (New York, 1962), emphasizes institutional weaknesses in civilian politics as a causal factor for military takeovers[4]

What emerges in the whole process while addressing the basic issue of Societal and Security Concerns of the Armed Forces is the real necessity of understanding of the individual in the Armed Forces and his mind, which can be called the Military Mind. It thus is the epicenter of our investigation process around which lies the answer to an organization, which is present, worldwide and has a universal presence in every nation state. The military service employs a huge amount of manpower especially in the land forces. This manpower requires being lead and logistically managed. The uniqueness of this manpower is that though the fighting echelon manpower is separate from their individual families yet they are inseparable unlike in any other organization. Therefore Mason argues that

“in a military service, someone has to become the intellectual master of the ever-expanding, increasingly complex technology; someone has to analyze, synthesize, plan, and recommend; someone has to identify and coolly interpret hostile capabilities; someone has to have the foresight, imagination, and courage to suggest solutions to problems that may be ten years away or more; someone has to address the ambitious bureaucrat, the single-minded politician, and the instant academic strategic analyst from the institution, confronting, discussing, arguing, and holding the corner”

Clausewitz was very precise in defining the qualities, which he sought in a general officer to meet the uncertainties of war; they are equally applicable for any military leader in peacetime:

“A strong mind which can maintain its serenity under the most powerful excitement . . . strength of character . . . discernment clear and deep ... energy, firmness, staunchness.... Here then, above all a fine and penetrating mind is called for, to search out the truth by the tact of its judgment.”

Conceptual Framework of Analysis

Notion of Security: The notion of security for the members of the Armed Forces exists at two levels. Individual and as a part of a group in which they serve i.e. infantry regiment or artillery regiment and so on or so forth. The preconditions which will allow them to achieve full security for the individual or as a part of the group will depend on the opportunity given by the organization to their achieving full potentials in the use of their equipment physically and understand intellectually the doctrine to use them at the time of crisis. As they will be facing adversaries equally alert, trained and endowed with the latest equipments with incorporated doctrines to have a significant teeth to tail ratio, any individual in the armed forces will have to achieve his full potential for survival by perusing their profession and avocation by grooming himself through constant training voluntarily even beyond the written down script and work beyond the normal call of duty.

As a part of the group he has to be provided with leadership of a nature different from those available in the civilian milieu. This is because in the profession of arm, the individual himself or as a part of a group has to constantly take risks to survive physically as compared to any other profession where the risks undertaken are rarely related to physical survival and more related to material, financial or legal aspects. Hence the notion of security for a person in the profession of arms has to be different from any other notion of security by other individuals in any nonmilitary profession. Secondly the personnel of the armed forces and their families may appear to be separate, yet they are inseparable. The individuals and their families are intrinsically linked together because of the constant threat arising out of the risk that the individual has to take while pursuing his daily duties of his profession individually or as a part of the group. The interesting part is that to minimize the risk factor and survive the individual has to train himself to the optimal levels of competence which itself has a built in factor of risk taking. Hence as a norm he has to attain his full potential by pursuing his profession, avocation or passion to survive by means laid down in the training manual or by any other choice he may advocate in the time of crisis – the last i.e. choice is related to the nature of innovative competence or innovation that he may train himself to undertake either as an individual or as a leader of a group.

Furthering the overview, Security for the Armed forces in particular would mean the ability to prevail and survive in a conflict with honor. It is important to note that in a situation of war, the Armed Forces and their actions in the conduct of war reflects the will of the nation state since the nation state dictates to the Armed Forces to use its coercive power to safeguard the sovereignty and integrity of the nation state. In peacetime the Armed Forces reflects the will of the government. It is interesting to note that during and unto the World War I, the Armed Forces were permitted to overrule Civilian leadership in the conduct, planning and perceptions related to war. However, all this has changed for the opposite during the World War II. These two opposite situation has itself created anomalies as to how the Armed Forces today can make them secure. It is well neigh impossible to discuss or manage in a single lecture or keynote address to do justice to the entire issue of securing security to the Armed Forces. The only issue that can be addressed with certain degree of sincerity is concerning the security of the families of the service personnel whether such families belong to the category of nuclear or extended families of such service personnel. As I will expound below that attention to the security of the families of service personnel will lead towards greater sense of security being instilled in the mind and psyche of the service personnel.

Securing the Service Conditions: It is a myth and a misnomer that service personnel in the Armed Forces can be employed for short time or for emergency period of service. The personnel have to be employed for a life time because, only when one is employed for a life time tenure with terminal benefits that he feels secure to take short time view and actions immediately with total disregard to tomorrow or to his own safety or life. This can be illustrated by any number of hazardous activities that a service person may have to undergo in his daily routine in peacetime or during war situation. Training to clear mine fields or using lethal explosives in peacetime or undertaking same duties during wartime has equal risk factors. A service person will undertake such risks at any point of time when he knows that his family will not be affected either by his death or disability at any point of time in his career or under any conditions of war and peace. No clever contract can be written to override a situation where the employer i.e. the government or the nation state is to gain more than the individual in terms of obligation towards the employer.

Therefore there is no other alternative for the government but to plan to employ service personnel for long period of time that creates its own sociology because Armed forces have to sue jeanery be their own class. This being the case and if the government does not find appropriate ways and means of supporting the families in every possible way and create conditions accordingly, very many major problems can and will be created. It will be important to note here that before the Suez Canal came into existence, soldiers were brought to India without their families from the U.K. These soldiers became a class on to themselves and were called Natives. They created their own progenies and the Empire found the situation difficult to handle. The Suez Canal eradicated this problem and brought in the families, which in a very significant way extended the life of the British Empire by another one hundred years. However, the Empire looked at the families as a nuisance and was forced to create a new microsm of life in general which lead to the establishment of Cantonments. Interestingly when the men moved out of Wellington these families were called abandoned families. Today we have given a new name called separated families. I wish to point out that the case of separated family or lack of accommodation for all ranks to house their families in peace station is a major concern of the Armed Forces.

Sociology Of The Armed Forces
Today in the ensconced world of the Armed Forces the concept of working women have been totally accepted. Hence the place that the women occupied in the Armed Forces enclave is rapidly changing particularly in amongst the officer class. So far a woman’s career was not seen in the past to be compatible to the career of that of the husband in the Army. Paternal attitude meant that a woman had a definite role which she under the present circumstances and changes will be unable to perform if she has now to persue an independent career or job. Secondly, turbulence created by the movement of a soldier out of the cantonment area on frequent postings has started having great effects on the lives of the children. This has lead to a situation where either the wife has to be kept at a permanent place or the children have to be admitted in boarding schools. One Child family is unwilling to do so or comply to such arrangements. Thirdly the social support to the families of a soldier from amongst the relatives in an extended family format has virtually disappeared today. There are hardly any good answers available to the multitudes of such questions which affects the very nature of societal security of the service personnel. Several steps like opening up and establishing of Army Central Schools have been tried with mixed results and uncertain long term impact.

The sociological problems of security has started becoming more complicated with the husband and the wife being employed in the Armed Forces. Without pronouncing on whether women should join the Army or not the answer to the primary problem will have to be found. Take the case of US involvement in Iraq War during which both the husband and the wife were mobilized. The most acute security problem that has arisen is that of the children left back in the country of their birth without any form of societal or institutional or service security! With the single parent norm which has recently started emerging and which is being pursued by a certain class in India itself, the problem may well neigh be intractable. Therefore the progeny or the children of the service personnel will more acutely feel the sense of the lack of security.

Conclusion
In the ultimate analysis, the Armed Forces as a whole will have to find the answer to the societal and security problems faced by them. The land army being the largest will be faced with the issue more than her counterparts in the Navy and the Air Force. The government and the nation state cannot ignore the seminal role that the Armed Forces as an organization will continue to play in the life of a nation. Armed Forces has been an engine of upward social mobility and will continue to be so. This fact cannot be ignored. Also cannot be ignored the fact that from amongst the members of the senior officers fewer numbers are joining the Armed Forces. There is even insecurity when many of the personnel do not find suitable life partners. This indicates that many other professions have overtaken the Armed Forces as attractive vocation. Though all this empirical evidence indicates that the Armed Forces are rapidly falling behind, yet they are still considered as the most reliable organization in India in the time of crisis. Though a paradox the value of the Armed Forces are what they are because they enjoy a degree of autonomy.


 I am indebted to Lt. Gen Ashok Joshi(Retd.) for the intellectual inputs that he gave me while preparing this address. I am also thankful to a staff officer in one of the Command Headquarters to make me understand the nuances of calculation of the number of family accommodation available in the Indian Army.

 Leslie Bethell, (Ed), Latin America: Politics and Society Since 1930, Cambridge University Press, U.K., p. 420.

 Ibid, p.420.

Ibid.p. 420.

Air Vice Marshal R A Mason, “ Innovation and the Military Mind”, (Adapted for AU-24 from Air University Review, January-February 1986.
The family accommodation of the Indian Army is calculated in a way that authorizes married personnel to have 50% accommodation in case of the other rank, 60% in case of NCOs, 80% in case of Havildars, 100% for the JCOs and 100% in case of the Officers. This works out that nearly 80% of married personnel in the Indian Army are entitled for family accommodation in one form or the other. However, only 20% of the 80%is available as of today. The Jaswant Singh Committee has recommended the incorporation of MSW scheme, which is yet to see the light of the day.