Bad blood between personnel in a military unit — leading to a spur-of-the-moment conflagration — is not unknown, either in this country or elsewhere. In the colonial era too, when what would become India’s national army began to take shape, there have been instances involving individuals that sometimes escalated into something unseemly. However, the incident last Thursday at an artillery firing range in the Ladakh region near the Line of Actual Control (the disputed border with China), which involved both officers and jawans, and the subsequent turning on the commanding officer by some younger officers, appears unusual, even unprecedented. It was serious enough for the matter to be brought to the notice of the defence minister by the Chief of Army Staff.
A high-level court of inquiry has naturally been ordered and we need to have its findings before informed comment can be made. The reported facts, such as they are, leave the episode completely unclear. Officially, the Army has given out the barest facts and has chosen to deny outright certain reported aspects. Even while an inquiry is pending, however, it may have been better to place some more relevant facts before the public in a way that would not prejudice the inquiry. That may have been the best way to quell mess talk or any unsavoury speculation.
From what has been reported so far, a failure of command can be surmised. Regrettable as this is, it is even more worrying that an incident of this nature should have occurred near a disputed boundary with a powerful neighbour. Too many questions have been raised but too few answered. In these circumstances, a degree of demoralisation among both officers and men cannot be ruled out. It is beyond doubt that the first reports in the media would have emanated from defence sources, even if official denials followed. The disavowals would be taken as routine and unpersuasive, and an effort either to cover up or paper over the cracks. A selective but more credible release of facts was the better approach.
The unit in which the trouble broke out is to be disbanded, and its personnel dispersed. For the Army, in which the chain of command is sacrosanct and without which the force would be rendered less than useless, this is necessary. But it is important to conclude the inquiry swiftly and mete out punishments, which must not preclude dismissal. Also, since a command failure is indicated, a better system of vetting is needed to select COs for border areas. It is also not entirely clear why officers’ wives should have access to the mess at such locations. Taken together, these are quite a handful of issues. They need effective but sensitive
handling.