CAD
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 9, 2017
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
NEW DELHI: A comparison by academic Partha Chatterjeebetween Army chief Gen Bipin Rawat's defence of the "human shield" incident in Kashmir and British colonial officer Col Reginald Dyer's massacre of unarmed civilians in the infamous Jallianwala Bagh incident of 1919 has sparked off a furious controversy.
Chatterjee's article in the website Wire drew sharp condemnation from retired Army officers, who expressed shock and indignation at what they felt was a thoroughly inappropriate comparison between the two incidents in terms of scale and justification. The storm broke on social media after the article argued that Dyer had also justified his action as needed in the line of duty and invoked the need to be innovative.
"But careful and detached reflection will show chilling similarities between the justifications advanced for the actions of the British Indian Army in Punjab in 1919 and those being offered today, nearly a century later, in defence of the acts of the Indian Army in Kashmir," Chatterjee wrote. He quoted Rawat to say that he too was looking to emulate Dyer's justification of a "moral" lesson.
The reactions on Twitter were swift. "Shocking comparison to Imperial Army, blame media house for publishing it," said former Army chief Gen V P Malik. Brig B D Mishra said there is a hidden agenda behind the report and called for legal action against the author. Col V N Thapar said, "This is a very deliberately malicious act. If we have people like this in India, we don't need Pakistan."
"It would be unfair to suggest that General Rawat's motives are the same as those of Dyer. Rather, the similarity in their words stems from a structural feature that is now being revealed in the way in which the Indian Army is permanently deployed in regions under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act - like an occupying force in a conquered colony," the article said.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-with-dyer-stirs-row/articleshow/59009298.cms
Chatterjee's article in the website Wire drew sharp condemnation from retired Army officers, who expressed shock and indignation at what they felt was a thoroughly inappropriate comparison between the two incidents in terms of scale and justification. The storm broke on social media after the article argued that Dyer had also justified his action as needed in the line of duty and invoked the need to be innovative.
"But careful and detached reflection will show chilling similarities between the justifications advanced for the actions of the British Indian Army in Punjab in 1919 and those being offered today, nearly a century later, in defence of the acts of the Indian Army in Kashmir," Chatterjee wrote. He quoted Rawat to say that he too was looking to emulate Dyer's justification of a "moral" lesson.
The reactions on Twitter were swift. "Shocking comparison to Imperial Army, blame media house for publishing it," said former Army chief Gen V P Malik. Brig B D Mishra said there is a hidden agenda behind the report and called for legal action against the author. Col V N Thapar said, "This is a very deliberately malicious act. If we have people like this in India, we don't need Pakistan."
"It would be unfair to suggest that General Rawat's motives are the same as those of Dyer. Rather, the similarity in their words stems from a structural feature that is now being revealed in the way in which the Indian Army is permanently deployed in regions under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act - like an occupying force in a conquered colony," the article said.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-with-dyer-stirs-row/articleshow/59009298.cms
