Why young army officers in Uri camp are fuming

[Koovie]

I'm talking in a political sense not in a religious sense.

But India was founded on secular principles... as a home for people from every faith. So your logic cannot be applied on J&K.

 

[pursuit of happiness]

I'm talking in a political sense not in a religious sense.

--
can you explain political sense of muslim land please ...

 

[FaujHistorian]

Anger is bubbling among junior army officers after eight soldiers died in a militant strike on a military camp near Uri, in Jammu and Kashmir anger. The over-cautious commanders have tied their hands, they say.
In a WhatsApp message that is racing through army networks, the Uri debacle has been blamed on tight operational restrictions allegedly imposed after two Kashmiri boys were mistakenly shot dead on November 3 by soldiers manning a check point near Chattergam village, in Anantnag district of south Kashmir.
Then, in a swift attempt to quell public outrage, the army had ordered an inquiry that found nine soldiers of 53 Rashtriya Rifles culpable. Northern army commander, Lieutenant General D S Hooda, publicly admitted the army had made a mistake.
Days later, on November 13, an army court martial sentenced five soldiers, including two officers, to life imprisonment for killing three innocent Kashmiris in a fake encounter in the Macchil sector of north Kashmir in 2010.
In the bitter WhatsApp message, an unidentified officer has directly held his top commanders responsible for the Uri debacle. "As per reports, soldiers on the sentry duty on the army camp (at Uri) did not fire upon the approaching terrorist vehicle due to caution imposed on them after the Anantnag incident (sic)", says the WhatsApp message.
The message goes on: "When (the) Anantnag incident took place last month, corps commander of 15 corps and Army Commander of Northern Command had both called it a mistake… Should not the Army Cdr (commander) and Corps cdr (commander) consider resigning for this goof up (sic)."
"Now, what do they have to say? They had betrayed their own soldiers, who became cautious and the result is for everyone to see."
Highlighting a worrying faultline, the message demands: "Generals should stop playing to (the) gallery and mind their own business and allow soldiers to do their job (sic)."
Such bitterness is growing in combat unit and sub-unit commanders, who are caught between senior officers' demands to "deliver results", i.e. to kill militants; while at the same time uphold the human rights of locals, most of whom sympathise with militants, if not actively support them.

Image: Army personnel and relatives carry a coffin of Gurmail Singh, a soldier killed during the Uri encounter, as women wail during his funeral on the outskirts of Jammu. Photograph: Mukesh Gupta/Reuters
The army is scrambling to counter this unprecedented "social media" crisis. While nobody is speaking on the record, Business Standard learns the army is responding on social media, putting out a detailed account of the Uri incident. The aim is to prove that the militants benefited from laxity rather than from imposed restraints.
Lieutenant General Syed Ata Hasnain, a highly regarded former corps commander in Srinagar, says, "It is unfair to blame top commanders for demanding restraint. Every officer knows exactly what restraint implies; and it does not restrict legitimate use of force against militants."
Neither do accounts of the Uri strike support the view that soldiers' were operationally restrained. The attack began at 3 am, a time when civilian movement is totally banned and every stranger is considered suspicious.
Senior commanders in Kashmir have stoutly resisted pleas to lift the Disturbed Areas notification from large parts of Jammu and Kashmir, which means the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1990 would no longer apply in those areas. Even so, the army hierarchy is increasingly intolerant of human rights violations.
The WhatsApp message bitterly states: "We ought to accept such mistakes when we deploy the army for restoration of the situation. Everyone must understand the real purpose of AFSPA. It is meant to cover unintentional mistakes made by soldiers in the course of the performance of their duty."
The WhatsApp message strongly reflects the soldiers’ viewpoint that they are doing a thankless job for seniors, leaders and a public that neither understands nor sympathises with the army.
The officer writes, "Why does not this nation and its leaders understand the nuances of this "Designer war" heaped upon India by Pakistan since 1989? Unfortunately, even most military minds, both serving and retired, have failed to understand the reality of this war. It has nothing to do with "law and order"; it is war, sir! Most important, it is for generals to understand and grasp its characteristics and stop reacting to civilian hue and cry (sic)."

Why young army officers in Uri camp are fuming - Rediff.com India News

It is not anger of the junior officers.


It is combat fatigue where civilians are hostile and the army has to walk on egg shells. When young officers are put in a situation where they don't see an end.


Posting 100s of 1000s of soldiers in Kashmir for 30+ years is too long, very very long period.


India must come up with a UN mandated and executed solution.


peace

 

[janon]

It is not anger of the junior officers.


It is combat fatigue where civilians are hostile and the army has to walk on egg shells. When young officers are put in a situation where they don't see an end.


Posting 100s of 1000s of soldiers in Kashmir for 30+ years is too long, very very long period.


India must come up with a UN mandated and executed solution.


peace

The individual soldiers themselves are not posted there for 30+ years. They do operational tours of duty. Combat fatigue occurs when a soldier has been in combat for longer than he can take.

And BTW, most civilians are not hostile - there are 12 million civilians there, and a few hundred terrorists.

 

[Zarvan]

As long as India keeps occupying Kashmir they will keep loosing soldiers in Uri it was 8 it can be lot more in near future

 

[FaujHistorian]

The individual soldiers themselves are not posted there for 30+ years. They do operational tours of duty. Combat fatigue occurs when a soldier has been in combat for longer than he can take.
.

This is correct.

However fatigue is both individual and at institutional level.

your post focuses on just the first one.

...

And BTW, most civilians are not hostile - there are 12 million civilians there, and a few hundred terrorists.

Again, my bro you are confusing two different concepts.


Hostility is among much larger population.

While small percentage of them become militants.

 

[rubyjackass]

Wrong. On both counts.

1. There is no general uniform Kashmiri reaction to the Army. Srinagar hates the Army, Ganderbal hates the Army, Poonch loves the Army, Rajouri loves the Army, Anantnag hates the Army, (V)Baramull(a) is neutral etc.

Err, even that is wrong. Not all Srinagar hates the Army. Not all Poonch loves the Army. You get what I am saying. Some people here talk on the lines of 'all Kashmiris are traitors'. Something a normal jawan might agree with because he doesn't care why there is so much hatred. He just thinks that everyone is a potential attacker. A simplistic view but also one that tells that the goals of army there are not percolating to the men on ground. The army, by many accounts, postured as a tough force in the past, with all-out use of force sometimes. The idea is similar to intimidation that medieval armies used(Set an example by harsh punishment to avoid more challenge to authority). Some units might have gone rogue or simply took forward this philosophy, but what they did(rapes in some cases) alienated even the remaining population which was neutral or sympathizing with India. Believe me, there are still some secular-minded people left in the valley. You can find some refreshing columns in Kashmiri English newspapers online once-in-a-while. You can see that the IA did not take such incidents seriously just by looking at the number of personnel held responsible so far.

And... what happened to the Pandits does not justify the overlooking IA did, knowingly or by negligence.

3. The media has always been pro-news. They rode the patriotic wave during the Kargil conflict, supported the flood and earthquake operations, and at the same time pursued the sleazy scandals and 'human rights' things as well. They have followed the news to gain TRP. They run after anything that is sensational, anything that sells. Period.

The media has been pro-news and also quite forward looking in their approach. They also sold only what sells. And for an average patriotic Indian, IA in the white sells. And the Pakistani terrorist story sells. Very few reports were verified or covered all views(in the absence of verification). And the few incidents which stand as reasons for the general hatred for IA came out after some sustained and brave reporting by a very small number of journalists. And rarely a major media outlet gave a Kashmiri viewpoint in passing. I am not saying media conspired against the Kashmiris. It was an act of omission and taking the easy way out.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[Indo-guy]

Hostility is among much larger population.

While small percentage of them become militants.

If larger population had harbored hostility they would not have had come out in such a large numbers to vote .
they would have shown their hostility by boycotting the elections ...

 

[third eye]

As long as India keeps occupying Kashmir they will keep loosing soldiers in Uri it was 8 it can be lot more in near future

Okay..

and to what would you attribute losses of PA & pakistanis in IEDs, suicide bombs etc ?

 

[Bang Galore]

As long as India keeps occupying Kashmir they will keep loosing soldiers in Uri it was 8 it can be lot more in near future

6 supposedly well trained & motivated guys with surprise on their side and operating in darkness couldn't take down more than 8 of our boys before being mowed down. Pretty pathetic when you consider the size of the Indian army. The odds are terrible & all this is even before there has been retaliation by the IA.

 

[FaujHistorian]

If larger population had harbored hostility they would not have had come out in such a large numbers to vote .
they would have shown their hostility by boycotting the elections ...

please do not confuse elections/voting with military fatigue.

The two are totally different issues even though they happen to be in the same region.

 

[Bang Galore]

please do not confuse elections/voting with military fatigue.

The two are totally different issues even though they happen to be in the same region.

Remember that the military was in India's north east for over 40+ years before the situation settled down, even now there is a substantial presence. An imagined rant by someone who is probably not even in the army can hardly be taken as a sign of military fatigue. However much you may wish that.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Remember that the military was in India's north east for over 40+ years before the situation settled down, even now there is a substantial presence. An imagined rant by someone who is probably not even in the army can hardly be taken as a sign of military fatigue. However much you may wish that.

please stick to OP.

That's what we are discussing. Right?

6 supposedly well trained & motivated guys with surprise on their side and operating in darkness couldn't take down more than 8 of our boys before being mowed down. Pretty pathetic when you consider the size of the Indian army. The odds are terrible & all this is even before there has been retaliation by the IA.

What you say is a spin.

What the OP says is about young army officers' complaints.

you my bro are going on a tangent.

 

[Bang Galore]

please stick to OP.

That's what we are discussing. Right?

You were referring to fatigue. Are you suggesting that the Indian army has a different reaction to it depending on where they are posted?

What you say is a spin.

What the OP says is about young army officers' complaints.

you my bro are going on a tangent.

The OP is just an unverified piece. Even if it were true, all it does is ask for an even freer hand. Spin is what you are doing looking for all sort of "hidden" references - this was an artillery position who probably have never seen much militancy & they are suffering fatigue? The young officers?. If that isn't a major leap into the weird, I don't know what is?

12 terrorists were killed (6+6) in two separate incidents (not even counting the other 2 killed elsewhere) and these were supposedly highly trained guys. I merely pointed out the odds that are stacked against them if one (some of your countrymen were making the argument) assumed that India would be forced to buckle with more such incidents.

 

[FaujHistorian]

The OP is just an unverified piece.

If that is true, then you should not be posting in this thread for more than couple of times.

Because the rest of us all are really discussing OP.