Army and the Social Media: Emerging Challenges

Major General Mrinal Suman

Venting of grievances by the soldiers on the social media is a new phenomenon. The recent torrent of videos has caught the services unaware. It is a challenge whose severity is bound to increase with the development and proliferation of technology. It is time serious attention is paid to address the issue as it has the potential to promote indiscipline, spread disaffection, weaken officer-man cohesion and undermine morale. While discussing the issue, three critical imperatives need to be kept in mind.

First, the quality of the contemporary soldierly stock is quite different. Earlier, rural youth with little education and limited demands joined the Indian army. They were hardy and accepted the privations of the environment without questioning them. The army of today is more ubiquitous. It draws manpower from all segments of the society. The current generation of soldiers is better educated. Having being exposed to the electronic media, their awareness level is of a much higher order.

Consequently, there has been a phenomenal rise in the expectations and aspirations of the soldiers. They have become very conscious of their position, and are sensitive to any threat, real or perceived, to their self-worth. Like the rest of the society, their value system is also undergoing major changes. They question various policies and practices, and are quick to spot iniquities and imperfections of the system.

Secondly, nature and character of the media have undergone major changes in the last few years. There has been a massive proliferation of electronic media beaming 24/7 news. As most Indian media agencies do not possess adequate resources for gathering true ground reports, most tend to presuppose details and base their reports on hearsay or conjectures. In the absence of genuine news material, they tend to concoct news to be the first to break a story.

Worse, Indian print and electronic media thrives on sensationalism. For example, repeated running of the soldiers’ videos on news channels was hardly warranted. An unhappy soldier’s shot of an over-cooked chapatti was not an issue of national concern, as was made out by the competing media. Notwithstanding the above, the media cannot be wished away. The army will have to learn to cope with its waywardness. 

Thirdly, technology is a double-edged weapon. It can be a friend or a foe. In the hands of inimical elements, social media can be a lethal tool. It has unprecedented reach and can be cleverly manipulated to tweak the truth to present a distorted version of the facts. Our troops are tech-savvy and are cognizant of the power of the social media. When under stress, they may be tempted to resort to venting their disenchantment through it.

Whereas the soldiers can be deterred through the threats of disciplinary proceedings, the same cannot be said of their families, friends and sympathizers. With smartphones, it is easy to upload photographs/videos. The electronic media is always on the lookout for such anomalous news to enhance TRPs. It is a challenge that defies a straightforward solution.

The Way Forward

In a 1.3 million strong force, it is well nigh impossible to keep everyone happy. There will always be some with grievances, both perceived and real.

Three steps can be taken to contain the problem. One, efforts should be made to ensure that the time-tested norms of man-management are given additional importance to improve general satisfaction level and minimize complaints. Two, well-established mechanism of redressal of grievances should be strengthened and made more credible. Three, the environment should be made aware of the true state of affairs in the army to contain the negative fallout.

·         Appreciating Soldiers’ Sensitivities

Changed environment demands a change in leadership techniques. Leaders have to learn to handle the soldiers with more compassion. Compassion does not mean dilution of discipline. On the contrary, a compassionate leader acquires moral authority and psychological ascendency over his command. Troops respect him and trust him. Willing obedience and discipline are the natural corollary.

Soldiers are facing much higher levels of stress these days. Regular contact with the families through modern telecom keeps soldiers embroiled in day to day problems faced by their families – children falling sick or not studying or ill-health of parents or troubles caused by unruly neighbours. Soldiers feel helpless and become fretful. Earlier joint family system took care of many such exigencies.

Further, with an increase in the education level of soldiers’ wives, many are highly qualified and gainfully employed. They prefer to stay at one place for the sake of their career and children’s education. Resultantly, soldiers are deprived of family support in times of emotional disturbances. At times, stress tends to become distress.

In addition, modern soldier is highly conscious of his self-esteem. Most soldiers abhor sahayak (buddy) duties and consider them to be degrading. To start with, no soldier should be detailed on these duties in the stations where families are allowed to stay. Similarly, soldiers resent being detailed to cut grass or sweep roads or maintain golf courses.  All tasks related to the maintenance of cantonment facilities must be outsourced to civilian agencies.

In other words, measures must be initiated to ensure that a soldier’s sensitivities are not unduly offended. No soldier should ever be asked to perform jobs which he considers to be ‘unsoldierlike’ and humiliating. Stress and humiliation make a lethal combination, generating ‘pressure cooker effect’ that results in irrational behavior.

·         Strengthening Existing Mechanism for the Redressal of Grievances

Indian army has a sound mechanism in place for the redressal of soldiers’ grievances. For personal issues, every soldier has a right to seek audience with his seniors through ‘Arzi Report’. In case his company commander is unable to solve the problem, the matter is referred to the unit commander. Level of ‘Arzi Report’ keeps getting raised, till the aggrieved soldier gets full redressal.

Senior inspecting officers invariably inspect ‘Arzi Report Registers’ of units and sub-units to gauge the overall quality of man-management. Records indicate the nature of common grievances and the degree of attention being paid to redress them.

If the Arzi Report route fails to satisfy a soldier fully, he can submit written appeal to the Chief (non-statutory complaints). All intermediate headquarters are required to study them and take necessary curative action, if within their powers. In case they are unable to resolve the matter, the case is put up to the higher authorities, till it reaches the Army Headquarters. Final decision is given by the Chief. If still unsatisfied, an aggrieved soldier can approach the Central Government through a statutory complaint.

In some units, due to the shortage of officers, a certain degree of complacency has crept in the ‘Arzi Report’ process. Written complaints rarely elicit response in the specified time-frame. Bureaucratic approach of the staff officers at the higher headquarters denies timely justice to the aggrieved. Immediate action needs to be taken to put the whole system back on track. 

   

·         Enhancing Media Awareness

For the media, attractiveness of news is directly proportional to its shock effect. As denigration sells, negative projection of all entities hogs limelight for days. The army is no exception.

As the media lacks resources and intimate knowledge of the services, it follows the easiest path of resorting to collecting bits of information to create news. Invariably such one-sided reporting turns out to be factually incorrect and damaging to the army.

On the other hand, the media justifiably faults the army for being unduly secretive and not sharing news with it. There is a need for mutual sensitization. Appreciating media’s compulsions/limitations, efforts should be made to educate it as regards army’s ethos, culture and functioning. Information should be shared with media in an honest and forthright manner, accepting weaknesses upfront to retain credibility. A well-informed media will not fall prey to some rogue videos that malign the army.

Finally

Unfortunately, the army has failed to respond to the videos in a mature manner. Instead of reposing faith in the time-tested mechanism for the redressal of grievances, the Army Chief has ordered placement of complaint boxes at all formation headquarters. It was an immature and panic reaction. Asking soldiers to forward complaints directly to him is a highly terrifying and perilous proposition. It undermines the complete chain of command, the keystone of army’s disciplinary bedrock. It is a proposition where the cure is worse than the disease.

Indian soldiers are a highly disciplined lot. They do not resort to indiscipline unless driven to it. As army’s environment is highly disciplined, hierarchal and restrictive, pent-up frustration may find expression through the social media. However, a vigilant and sympathetic leader can provide a ‘safety-valve’ to the stressed soldier through empathy and counsel. With commander’s support, he will feel reassured and relieved of all anxieties. Most complaints will cease to exist.

The system of redressal of grievances must be made more responsive and compassionate. Troops must be convinced that their genuine concerns would be attended to in a just, fair and time-bound manner. Necessary measures should be instituted to improve satisfaction level of the environment.

In the media-led world of today, perception is reality and perception is based on the image projected by the media. Therefore, the media can neither be ignored nor dismissed as irrelevant. Hence, it is necessary to keep the media apprised of all the developments, lest it is forced to release an asymmetrical story due to army’s failure to respond in time. It is equally important to accept organizational weaknesses honestly and use them as portals for corrective reforms.

New Chief and Challenges of Parochialism

New Chief and Challenges of Parochialism

Major General Mrinal Suman

Heartiest congratulations to the new Army Chief. As his credentials are commendable, he will surely lead the army with aplomb.

However, this write-up is not about military skills, operational experience and professional expertise for the top job. It concerns a far more critical issue – the malady of regimental parochialism that has been afflicting the army for long. Prejudiced attitude based on regimental and corps affiliations is collectively referred to as regimental parochialism. The virus of regimental parochialism has been gnawing at the vitals of army’s much vaunted organisational cohesion. It has been causing fissures along regimental/arm/service lines and has the potential to degrade army’s fighting potential – a worrisome prospect indeed.

Parochialism is a manifestation of narrow-mindedness and pettiness. It is a manifestation of selfish nature, unprofessional character and unethical disposition. Regrettably, many service officers rise in ranks but fail to outgrow narrow mindsets. They lack professional integrity and fail to treat all subordinates impartially without any bias. Partiality is an anathema to military leadership and no justification can condone it.

Fair and non-discriminatory conduct is an essential component of a commander’s obligations. Every dispensation extended on the basis of parochial disposition has three grave consequences. First, when regimental affiliations replace merit, the army is deprived of the best talent available. There are numerous cases where mediocre officers have risen to higher ranks by latching on to the coattails of their regimental seniors.

Secondly, search for recognition is one of the pursuits which all human beings indulge in and continuously strive for. Promotions and advancement in career are important aspects of their aspirations. When denied their due, the aggrieved are left with no choice except to knock at courts’ doors for their rights. Burgeoning number of court cases shows officers’ utter lack of faith in the fairness of the system.

Thirdly and most importantly, to betray an unquestioning soldier’s trust by playing favourites is the worst kind of impropriety a commander can be guilty of. Trust is the expectancy that the followers can rely on a leader’s impartial and just approach. Trust is a non-substitutable, priceless, intuitive and complex force. It flourishes on credibility that a leader enjoys in his command. Nepotism poses a grave threat to the credibility of the military leadership.

The institution of Colonel Commandant (Col Comdt) is the root cause of growth of parochialism in the army. Col Comdts are not elected because they are mature enough to be the father figure. The only criteria is their potential to wangle maximum benefits for the regiment, mostly undeserved. That is the reason why all prospective Chiefs and Army Commanders are much in demand.  It is a simple equation of quid pro quo. Regiments ‘invest’ in a Col Comdt and expect undue favours in return.

Unit citations and Commendation Cards are awarded on regimental considerations. Even the schedule of turn-over of units is subjected to undue influences. Special dispensation is managed for the regimental officers to facilitate their promotion. Even the ‘line of succession’ is tweaked in their favour.  In short, the institution of Col Comdt is an archaic legacy that is divisive in nature and encourages fissiparous tendencies.

It is essential to curtail the ambit and scope of the institution of Col Comdt. Army Commanders and the Chief should disassociate themselves from the institution. They are too senior to be identified with any regiments/arms. Recently introduced concept of Honorary Col Comdt must be shelved as it is devious in intent. It aims at usurping certain service privileges after retirement.

Perception Management is Exceedingly Important

For the health of any organisation, perceptions are as importance as facts and must be managed diligently. For that, it is essential that senior commanders not only act non-partisan, but also seen to be so. Caesar's wife must be above suspicion. Shedding of parochial regimental loyalties will be a key step in that direction. It is only then that the environment will develop confidence in the justness of the system.

Most inappropriately, every senior commander opts to choose his regimental officers as his personal staff (MA, AMA, Deputy MS, ADC and so on). Yes, it almost resembles a kitchen cabinet. In addition, they attempt to have maximum officers from their regiments in other key staff appointments. Social scientists consider it to be a manifestation of an acute sense of insecurity. Such unsure commanders prefer to surround themselves with their regimental cronies, lest their incompetence gets exposed to the environment. In return, they feel obliged to promote their protégés’ careers, normally at the cost of more deserving officers.

A few years ago, a Sapper Army Commander tried to set an example by having all his personal staff officers from different arms and services. He wanted to tell his command that he had no favourites. Unfortunately, rather than applauding and emulating him, most egotistical top-brass faulted him for ‘lacking in regimental loyalties’. What a shame! 

It should be a proscriptive norm that commanders should not select their personal staff from their own arm/regiment or community. This norm should be applicable to all – from divisional commanders to the Chief. In addition, there should be a cooling-off period of three years before a personal staff officer is considered for foreign posting. Hopefully, the mentor commander would have retired by then and the selection would be purely merit based.

For all senior ranks, there should be a common uniform with no regimental entrapments/accoutrements to continuously remind them of their regimental affiliations. They should wear khaki beret and no lanyard. This was the standard regulation earlier. As units were commanded by Lieutenant Colonels, regimental identity was limited to that rank. Now the units are commanded by Colonels. Therefore, Brigadier and higher ranks should shed regimental appurtenances and wear identical uniforms.  

No Army Commander should award unit citations or individual awards to his regiments without obtaining prior concurrence of the Army Headquarters. The current trend of ‘managing’ awards for the personal staff officers must also be stopped. No personal staff officer deserves an award. Awards are given for distinguished service to the nation and not for looking after the comforts of the boss diligently.

Finally 

A Chief should never forget that he is the Chief of the Indian army and not of his regiment/arm. Every single soldier of the army has a right to expect fair treatment and justice from the Chief. If he fails them, he forfeits the right to command them. It is as simple as that.

A Chief should also appreciate that it is difficult for the soldiers of other regiments/arms/services to identify themselves with a Chief who flaunts his regimental identity all the time. To them, he appears to be an alien. A Chief has to be above all predispositions, real or perceived.

Fortunately, the new Chief will have a long tenure. He will have adequate time and opportunities to usher changes, provided he is able to stay clear of the regimental morass.

To rid the army of factionalism, smooth ruffled feathers and re-forge cohesion will certainly be a tough challenge. The choice is entirely that of the new Chief. He can take up the challenge and carve a niche for himself in the annals of military reforms. Or else, he can opt to be a ‘passenger’ like his many predecessors whom the army and the country suffered. But then, only the daring are remembered by history for their audacity. Mediocrity leaves no foot-prints.*****