Army Chief Bipin Rawat has been making political statements.
These out of the ordinary conduct at the top levels of the defence forces is not good for preserving the institution’s neutrality.
What were the comments made by the Army chief?
India’s service chiefs have a long and healthy tradition of keeping away from politics in their public comments.
In contrast, Mr. Rawat has been vocal on politically sensitive issues like - religious identity, demographics, and India’s relations with its neighbours.
Mr. Rawat’s recently made comments about an “inversion in demographics” and a “planned migration” from Bangladesh into the Northeast.
He said that part of the Bangladeshi influx into India is driven by economic considerations, but some are pushed through as migrants to wage a proxy war.
He also alleged that this proxy war strategy was being supported and encouraged by China and Pakistan.
This string of comments could potentially hit at the core of the institutional neutrality that the services have cherished.
Why is it important to keep the army neutral?
Self-restraint in public commentary has helped in serving both Indian democracy and the military well over the years.
This is one of the reasons for India having successfully avoided military coups/rebellions unlike other countries in the neighbourhood.
This has also allowed the Army to maintain its professionalism and neutrality even during tasks such as communally polarising riot control operations.
This arrangement has also inhibited governments from bidding the Army to do their politically expedient tasks.
To maintain this neutral balance, it is important that the higher echelons of the defence forces resist from commenting on foreign policy and politics.
What are the risky fallouts of such loose commentary?
Comments coming from the defence chief have a greater impact in escalating hostilities with neighbouring rivals than from that of politicians.
It also risks reactions from home, which have already come in the form of a sharp response from the All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF).
AIUDF has charged Mr Rawat with straying away from his constitutional remit, a dialogue if furthered could potentially ruin army’s shied of neutrality.
Notably, the latest comments aren’t Mr. Rawat 1st ones, and he has been stirring this “hornet’s nest” ever since he assumed office at various forums.
As these developments risk reducing the army’s stature from being a state organ to that of a political organ, a course correction is direly needed.
