Articles Comments

Pak Tea House » Democracy, India, minorities, Pakistan » Liberal Democracy and Minority Rights

Liberal Democracy and Minority Rights

democracy2-300x220PTH is grateful to Gorki sahib for making this contribution on request. 

Gorki

In 1940 M. A. Jinnah delivered the presidential speech at the Lahore session of the AIML which in hindsight is perhaps one of the most important speeches ever delivered by anyone in the 20th century India.  Gandhi; he said, had invited the AIML to join the congress in the future presumably democratic constituent assembly of India. But, despite its egalitarian appearance it was an unequal relationship, said Jinnah,  for in it, “brother Gandhi has three votes whereas he had only one”. Jinnah thus in that one instance neatly summed up not only his own, but the fear of every minority minded politician before and after him who had ever to face a majority opposition in a democratic set up because on the face of it, a democracy seems all about numbers; the majority wins, and the winner takes all.

Jinnah was not alone then or since. Even more people may agree with him today because the first decade of the 21st century has not only witnessed raucous scenes of crowds in the Muslim Arab world screaming democracy-hypocrisy, we have also witnessed the recent bloodbath and balkanization in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and the failure of a brief democratic experiment in Egypt. For many of us it has only reinforced the idea that democracy is indeed ill suited for most ethnically mixed countries for it only leads to strife and disintegration by fostering majority rule and marginalization of the minorities.

However many people critical of Jinnah may be surprised to find out that he was not the only liberal minded statesman who had expressed a fear of democracy.  More than a century before him, American founding father and its second president John Adams had expressed his own reservations. Democracy, he said “while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy and democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself”. And he pessimistically concluded that there was never a democracy that did not commit suicide. Thomas Jefferson, another founding father and a fierce supporter of democratic values, sounded equally glum when he noted that a democracy was nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. Many other american founding fathers and revolutionaries including Alexander Hamilton and James Madison privately and publicly shared John Adams’ fear that a democracy may well end up as nothing more than a ‘tyranny of the majority’ as Adams put it.

It is therefore illustrative to understand the apparent paradox of how and why these legendary figures, who had as great reservations about democratic rule as their modern day counterparts, went on to found a nation that not only swears by its democratic values but also prides itself as a bastion of democracy.

The secret of the success of the American founding fathers lay precisely in their cynicism and their brilliant grasp of human nature. James Madison, easily the most cerebral of the founding fathers laid out the challenge in the following often quoted words:

“If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. – (James Madison Federalist Paper No. 51 (1788-02-06)

So having understood the inherent risks of a pure and unbridled democracy the American founding fathers set about to establish a system that would not only check and govern the country but do so while checking and governing itself.

Many discussions and deliberations went into the debate which took place, publicly and privately over many months. In private letters and essays, pamphlets and articles that these men wrote under their own names and pseudonyms they published articles in the press in order to create a public opinion in favor of a system which was democratic in nature but complemented by a series of checks and balances in such a way so as to be representative of and protector of all, and not just the majority.

The first idea that emerged from these public deliberations was the nature of the government. Madison was able to persuade others that while a (democratic) government was necessary the government itself needed checks. He then elaborated why these were essential; to protect the average citizen, but especially the minorities. In a letter to Jefferson, he wrote the following.

“Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our Governments, the real power lies in the majority of the Community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from the acts of Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of the constituents. The idea that even an elected government needed checks was a revolutionary idea for that time and must be heeded all the more so today.

The second revolutionary idea to emerge was on the nature of sovereignty and the attendant rights that went along with it. Previously the concepts of sovereignty and of rights were paid a scant attention or else it was assumed that both these lay with the ruler; by a divine right. Even when some of these rights were wrested from a sovereign ruler as in the Magna Carta, the Rights had been ceded back reluctantly and under duress.

By placing the sovereignty firmly in the hands of the ruled the American revolutionaries, inspired by ideas of liberalism and enlightenment brought the citizens, specifically the individual citizen at par with the till then, mighty State. Thomas Jefferson famously asserted in his Declaration of Independence, that ‘Rights lay with the people, because all men being created equal they all came into this World with certain unalienable Rights, which came to them from their ‘creator’ and the purpose of the Government was first and foremost to secure those Rights’ for them.

Furthermore the constituent assembly was urged to specifically enumerate which of those rights would not be ceded to the elected government. This was an important concept and considerable debate took place around it. The Federalists led by Alexander Hamilton argued that any such enumeration would actually be restrictive, since over time the State could encroach on any new undiscovered rights not listed as retained. By ceding only those rights that were discussed specifically it was argued that it was understood that the government had no authority to legislate on anything not discussed. The Anti Federalists like Patrick Henry on the other hand insisted on specifying the rights retained by the citizens in order to make it clear as to where the government had no authority to interfere.

In the end a compromise was reached. The constitution was ratified as it was (without the list of Rights) but a specific list of rights were enumerated and added to the constitution as amendments; now known as The Bill of Rights. No future government may legislate on these Rights because it was voted by the constituent assembly that these Rights belonged to the people outside the purview of the State and the government.

Third and even more important concept of the American Republic was the idea of what constituted a minority. The founding fathers were well aware of the fact that while there were apparent minorities, racial, ethnic and religious; the concept of minority was ever changing and may change again in the future, depending on the issues involved. For example, many religiously inspired people of different ethnicities could (and did) collude around faith based ideas such as an opposition to abortion, or a support for school prayer, and oppress a ‘minority’ of those who disagreed. The founding fathers were thus far sighted enough to not specify any one particular minority but to lay the basis for the protection of even the smallest of the possible minorities, all the way down to a minority of one.

Here again James Madison in his eloquent style argued that “It is of great importance in a republic, not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers; but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure..”

The solution, then Madison proposed, (in addition to the Bill of Rights as discussed above) was to exploit the existence of many fault lines within the society so as to diffuse and disperse power (and with it extreme mob passions) in such a way that colluding against a minority became difficult. Thus he advocated not only to fashion seperate (State and Federal) governments, but also to distribute power within the governments among its different arms so that each one with their pet passions checked the others in a way that no one body was by itself powerful enough to overwhelm the others. He wrote that ‘whilst all authority in it (the State) will be derived from, and dependent on the society, the society itself will be broken into so many parts, interests and classes of citizens, that the rights of individuals or of the minority, will be in little danger from interested combinations of the majority’. (The Federalist (No. 51, by Madison)

Thus came about the constitutional Republic of the United States of America, a system of an elected government but with a limited mandate, with multiple powers but divided between its different arms, fortified by checks and balances, both internal and external, and a citizenry protected from itself and from the elected government by a Bill of Rights. A governance structure that Lincoln was to famously call the government of the people, by the people and of the people.

Though in principle the lofty constitutional documents were signed in 1787 it would be another century and a half before it’s full significance was finally grasped by many of its still illiberal constituents. Once that occurred however a whole series of illiberal laws and cultural practices were overturned and reversed. Most significantly the African American minority emerged from slavery to freedom and then from segregation to full integration and equal civil rights. Later on other minorities, the traditional ones like ethnic minorities and the non traditional ones like the atheists (unwilling to pray in schools) and the homosexuals (wanting to marry), followed in their wake and gained parity. The struggle for justice was not easy and almost always political battles occurred in the face of hostile majorities, some even in the face of violent opposition yet at the end of the day they all prevailed, legally and quite peacefully; backed by nothing more than the power of the constitution, -rules laid down by a handful of learned men two centuries ago.

By doing the above the American people have demonstrated that a properly organized democratic republic carries within its own rule book enough tools to right any wrong and to protect any minority no matter how weak and vulnerable, provided the citizens take the time to understand their constitution and then insist that the State and the society stands by it.

There are lessons here for both India and Pakistan. And we need not wait so long either.

 

 

Written by

Filed under: Democracy, India, minorities, Pakistan · Tags: , , ,

  • kaalchakra

    Brother Tajender
    .
    Were you or Irfan Habib able to identify even one Muslim ruler in India’s history who was an Islamic bigot? If you can’t find a ruler, even any odd leader will do (unless some Indian historians can somehow associate the man with Pakistan).
    .
    I don’t see any Islamic religious bigotry anywhere in India, either presently or historically. Do you?

  • tajender

    Loved it when Hakim ullah Masood was killed
    So nice. I even distributed sweets

    RHR it means they were right in killing u people and distributing sweets.

    JO MARA HAI BAKRI NE BAKRE SEENGH

    TO BAKRA BHI MAREGA BAKRI KE SEENGH.

    pathological hatred.

  • Mohan

    Here it is reported that he was hacked to death. Not sure, whether this website can be trusted.

    VHP leader DS Kuttappa hacked to death in protest against #TippuJayanti at Madikeri, Karnataka

    http://samvada.org/2015/news/vhp-leader-ds-kuttappa-hacked-to-death/

  • kaalchakra

    Mohan, that website seems to be a bit confused. If you read the article, this is what it itself quotes a VHP member as saying: “A stone hit Kuttappa and he was deeply injured and died in hospital.”

  • tajender

    Were you or Irfan Habib able to identify even one Muslim ruler in India’s history who was an Islamic bigot?

    not a single hindu left india because of fear being hindu during moghul period.moghul never said that they own india.they said we are manager or servant.fascist says it is my country others are guests.

    tell me the names of 2 godhra victims whom insurance money was paid.abhinav bharat,super rss planted bombs everywhere in india and blamed muslims.divijay says 26/11 was work of rss.during mandal movement they were burning alive high caste boys,who were supposed to be their supporter.
    in vyapam case so many people ,all hindus are already murdered.hirn pandya brhmn opponent of modi was murdered by rss men.his father told this in interview to some magzine.
    vhp people are mineral thieve to keep that line clear ,they will do everything.maharaja of mysore was a dummy king intalled by britishers to smoothen the robbery of national minerals.
    they are nobodys friend.they hate low caste hindus and women more than muslims.

  • tajender
  • kaalchakra

    Thanks, Tajender.
    .
    I will now open that question to anyone who considers himself a liberal. Can we name one Muslim ruler in all of the history of India who was an Islamic bigot, and why we might agree or disagree with Tajender and Irfan Habib on that?
    .
    We are trying to understand the Indian narrative here.

  • tajender

    they were ruler neither hindu nor muslim.most of the conversion in india took place during british time.
    brhmns became powerful during muslim rule.there was no movement including underground against them in india by brhmns.

  • Mohan

    While waiting in a small hall in 7RCR, I could feel meticulous professionalism and humility all around. We weren’t sure if PM would make it on time as he was travelling back from Kashmir and it was also the eve of Bihar election results. 6.30 sharp he arrived in spotless white kurta payjama and his trademark jacket. He listened to us, one by one, with absolute concentration and then he spoke with wit, humor, concerns, anecdotes and hope. I have never heard a better half hour speech on tolerance. Some highlights:
    .

    He told us about his belief that cultural space shouldn’t be ‘rajya aashrit’ (Government dependent) as it takes away the voice of reason but it should be ‘rajya puraskarit’ (Awarded by the state). And without ‘fearless cultural evolution’ we would be a robotic society.
    .

    He clarified that he never received any request from any ‘kalakar’ to meet him. “One day I saw on TV that Shri Munnawar Rana was saying that ‘if PM invites us, we’ll go and tell him about our concerns’ so I immediately called my secretary and asked him to invite Shri Rana at his convenience but till date no one has come’. As a PM, he can’t go beyond this. Home Minister Rajnath Singh has publicly extended invitation, twice, but no one has responded.

    On Kalburgi and Dadri, he said that no one has met the Governors of respective states and lodged their concerns in order to be channeled to him as he can’t interfere in State’s issues. He had asked the Karnataka Govt. to send him all the files on Kalburgi murder but they have not sent them as yet.

    .
    He illustrated an example of administrative intolerance. During the last days of AB Vajpayee’s government, it was decided to make 6 AIIMS. The then health minister Sushma Swaraj named the Patna AIIMS Jaiprakash Narayan Institue and similarly other 5 were also named on non-Congressi national leaders. Vajpayee’s government lost and Congress came in power. UPA passed a bill in the parliament and ‘banned’ these names to be used for any Government project. That was the level of intolerance, he cited.
    .

    He was concerned about ‘political concern vs national interest’. He cited that 54 Heads of African countries were in India for the Indo-African summit. “So many heads of state don’t even attend a state funeral’ he said sarcastically. “1/3rd of the world’s population, its concerns and aspirations were represented yet in our media and public discourse this event was absent’. He said emphatically ‘If there is a loss to the country due to my mistake, please criticize me which you must… punish me… but just to oppose me or any other political rival, one shouldn’t forget national interest’.
    .

    He quoted how Galileo was killed for opposing a belief but in India, when Charvak, an atheist, challenged Vedas with logic and rejected the idea of reincarnation he was given the title of ‘Rishi’. Indian thought isn’t about tolerance, its’s about acceptance. He reminded that the societies, which championed the cause of human rights, are the ones who initiated two world wars whereas India has been the most peace generating country, in global context. He said ‘I have absolute faith that ‘tapasya’ of thousands of years can’t be destroyed by you and me’.

    I proposed to him that he should talk to people from ‘cultural sphere’ including those who don’t agree with him. I told him that I’d want to hold such interaction in Mumbai as in Delhi ‘culture can’t be without politics’. Amidst laughter, he instantly agreed. I said we would organize it whenever he has time to which he said ‘…then it will never happen… you tell me the time and I’ll adjust’.
    .

    This wasn’t a one-way speech. This was informal, interactive chat filled with humor, ideas and positivity. And of course, there was chai along with chaas, dhokla, idlis and veg kathi rolls which were literally forced down on us by the Prime Minister himself.
    .
    http://www.opindia.com/2015/11/vivek-agnihotri-writes-why-how-and-when-of-the-successful-marchforindia-campaign/

  • posit

    Islam’s plan is to exterminate non-muslims. Many non-muslim opportunists and cowards are helping the muslims in this by trying to find favour in the eyes of the muslims.

    Islam brings with it terror and total obedience/subservience under islamic fascism.

    Every one who converts to islam strengthens islamic fascism and islamic terrorism. this is happening since 1400 years and muslims are now inescapably in this mental and physical imprisonment.

    After non-muslims are decimated the muslims will turn their bloodthirst against themselves and their animals.

  • HaHa

    In Bihar’s new dawn, 58 % of legislators have criminal records. Of course these figures need to be vetted as they were reported by NDTV. Even if true, it still probably means a big improvement over the past, especially because this is under a new ‘tolerant and secular’ government. Unlike in the past when criminal legislators were part of a partly ‘communal and intolerant’ government.

  • Arzu

    How is this a false equivalence.. RHR
    How is kutapa or a pujari or kalburgi killing different than aklaq.. Like a liberal your theories hold only when you divide the humanity into minority/majority or different faiths.. With this division liberals can assign weight age to human life and use it for their purpose.
    Learn from your Indian liar liberals who shout intolerance from the rooftops when a Muslim is killed in India but have perfected the art of vanishing if incidents like this happen… Or more interestingly learn the art of blaming rss if someone insist on highlighting that they are trying to whip up communal frenzy among otherwise peaceful communities living together for centuries..

  • RHR

    Arzu sahib

    As I said earlier that what you are blaming Indian liberals for, is something for I get blamed by Pakistanis. They want me to show the same outrage when a Shiite kills a Sunni or a Christian kills a Muslim. They have said that I am a hypocrite because all I see is Christians get killed, Ahmedis get killed or Hindus get killed in Pakistan. And how I am only seeing “negative” things in Pakistan
    My response is that they (right wing) are already condemning such killings rather too much while giving apologetic defense to their own side’s atrocities.
    And I also politely tell them that expecting me to condemn a minority instigated killing is only correct, if they are condemning killings instigated by majority groups. They are merely deflecting and coming up with all sorts of apologetic defenses.
    With respect to India, if FF does not feel the same outrage, then so what! You also don’t feel the same outrage either!

  • Mohan

    Misa Bharti offers her candidature for CM post claiming RJD the single largest party.

  • posit

    Hindus did not get exterminated in India as yet because hindu religions are more resistant to islamic lies and violence than christianity and zoroastrianism.
    So islam did exterminate chr. and z. in West Asia, North Africa, Anatolia etc. and in Iran etc.


    The muslims did try to exterminate hindus in India (with less success than elsewhere) – but that is what they did as soon as they got their islamic paradise of Pakistan.

    Islam means (intention/result of) genocide of non-muslims. That is proved over 1400 years.

    So how are the muslims’ genocidal plans developing?
    Frothing on their mouths they are.
    Are muslims doing anything to stop this criminal arab religion in Syria? But blaming US is their hobby.

    Fascism shows itself with its 21st century face in this arab religion.

  • oldtimer

    It is typical of muslims to exterminate non-muslims and then claim that islam is safe for non-muslims and no other religion protects others like islam does and what not for lies and propaganda.

    All grand claims made by islam and muslims are lies from a to z.
    What else does one expect from a fascist primitive ideology?
    Big claims and lies. Nothing else.

    And human beings, even decent ones, have been tolerating this ideology for 1400 years like big fools and cowards, rying to make a big show of their tolerance where none is deserved.
    Genuine God will put an end to this religion soon (if he is geuine).

  • hellfire

    “septic TANKY”??? what is this…nursery school? ok so mASSadi, consider yourself the big bad bully of nursery skool lol. count your “victory” over “tanky!”

    and get yourself some help man.

  • Kumar

    Happy Diwali Pakistan. If you don’t believe in celebrating Diwali, then Happy Diwali to your ancestors who certainly did.

  • Rajeshwar

    A dalit minor girl was raped near patna collectorate.
    A woman constable shot dead for protesting against molestation.
    Lalu Returns

  • Ramsen

    Tipu Sultan was born on 20Nov 1750 but Congress govt celebrates his Jayanti on 10 Nov, deliberately coinciding with Diwali. 225 yrs ago TIpu had killed 750 Mayandam Iyengars on Diwali. Such was the horror of the massacre that to this day the Mayandam Iyengar community does not celebrate Diwali, observes it as Black Day.

  • Lord Kejriwal suspends Munish Raizada from AAP for calling LaluYadav ‘a convicted corrupt criminal’.He was convener of AAP’s NRI Cell.

  • tajender

    TIpu had killed 750 Mayandam Iyengars on Diwali.

    a lie all his top ministers were iyenger.iyengers were close to him after defeat they started helping britishers to loot minerals of karnataka.

  • tajender
  • BREAKING: ULFA leader Anup Chetia to be handed over to India by Bangladesh!
    .
    Earlier Chota Rajan and now Chetia.

  • tajender
  • tajender
  • Mohan

    Why veterans are returning medals, on the issue of OROP

    Copied

    There is only one demand ie. implementation of OROP. The govt notification issued is a rehash of the announcements made by Parrilar on Sep 5 with one change. Why it took two months to translate his statement into officialese is a mystery.
    .
    What has been announced is an improvement on existing pensions, but by no stretch of imagination can it be said to comply with the definition of OROP enunciated by the Koshiyari Committee and accepted by parliament, both the UPA government and Mr Modi himself who has made several public announcements in this regard.
    .
    Let us examine the difference between what OROP means and what has been given. First the definition
    .
    OROP “implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces Personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.” The concept includes “bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners and the past pensioners, and also future enhancements in the rate of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners. In armed forces, equality in service has two components, namely, rank and length of service. The importance of rank is inherent in armed forces as it has been granted by the President of India and signifies command, control and responsibility in consonance with ethos of service. These ranks are even allowed to be retained by the individual concerned after his/her retirement. Hence, two armed personnel in the same rank and equal length of service should get same pension irrespective of date of retirement and any future enhancement in rates of pension be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.”
    .
    To put it simply two pensioners with the same rank and length of service will get the same pension today, tomorrow, next year and that every time a current retirees pension is revised so too will that of a past pensioner.
    .
    Now what exactly does the govt notification say. (I’ve left out the “armed forces are wonderful blah lah” bit.)
    .
    I. To begin with, pension of the past pensioners would be re-fixed on the basis of pension of retirees of calendar year 2013 and the benefit will be effective with effect from 1.7.2014.
    .
    If the effective date is 01 July 2014, why is the pension being fixed as 01 July 2013 and what difference does it make? I have no answer to the first question but as for the second, the 6CPC introduced something called annual increase in salary (not increment). Therefore, the pension on 01 July 2013 and 01 July 2014 are different. Therefore, IMMEDIATELY there is a discrepancy between a past pensioner and a current pensioner. NOT OROP.
    .
    As for the effective date being 01 July 2014, it only shows Parrikar as a liar. He had several times assured delegations of ESMs that they should not worry about the delay in issuing as orders as they would be implemented wef 01Apr 2014 no matter when the orders were issued. Parrikar may have saved the excequer a few hundred crores at the expense of his honour.
    .
    II. Pension will be re-fixed for all pensioners on the basis of the average of minimum and maximum pension of personnel retiring in 2013 in the same rank and with the same length of service.
    .
    This applies to PBORs who have different pensions depending on their pay groups. We again have multiple pensions for personnel with the same rank and length of service. – NOT OROP.
    .
    III. Pension for those drawing above the average shall be protected.
    .
    See above.
    .
    IV. Arrears will be paid in four equal half yearly instalments. However, all the family pensioners, including those in receipt of Special/Liberalized family pensioners, and Gallantry award winners shall be paid arrears in one instalment.
    .
    No problem.
    .
    V. In future, the pension would be re-fixed every 5 years.
    .
    Since past retirees pensions are fixed at 2013 level while present retirees pensions increase by 3% every year, the gap between past and present pensions will be 3% at time of implementation, 6% this year, 9% next year, 12% in 2107 and 15% in 2019.OROP means there should be no difference, so this is clearly NOT OROP.
    .
    The one significant change from the Sep announcement is that OROP will be applicable for those who sought Premature Retirement in the past, but not for those who do so in the future. This is a horrendous decision taken with no thought whatsoever.
    .
    Promotion in the armed forces is against a vacancy. A vacancy occurs when an incumbent retires or dies. Officers who are not promoted can either take premature retirement in which case they create a vacancy for a younger officer to be promoted or they can stay. In the past most officers who reached a stage where they had no further scope for promotion took PMR and tried to start a second career outside. Now if their pensions are going to take a hit, they will think twice and not leave. The net result will be that you have a force in which the majority of officers are superseded and one in which the promotion rate is further decreased. Definitely not a recipe for efficiency or motivation.
    .
    Further, by drawing a distinction between a past retiree who has taken PMR and a future retiree the notification again violates the concept of OROP.
    .
    This article explains the ramifications of this decision in detail.
    .
    OROP Announcement – Putting Forces in Harm’s Way
    .
    It is not difficult to see through the game politicians and bureaucrats have played with OROP announcements.
    .
    It was declared in a hurry just before the Bihar elections to garner some brownie votes, and then they came back and announced it in a tearing hurry.
    .
    What has come out from the Govt, is surely a shot in its foot, which they will have to limp for times to come.
    .
    There are about 7 anomalies which are well known in the media and remain unresolved – Gen Satbir and his team is already at it.
    .
    I want to touch just one of them which they have served half-baked – the non application of One Rank One Pension (OROP) to future Pre Mature Retirement (PMR) cases of officers and men.
    .
    Like all militaries in the World – the Indian Armed forces have a structured, steep pyramidal structure, and there are fixed vacancies in a particular rank – so structurally you need lots of soldiers in junior ranks and fewer as they go up the ladder.
    .
    This is not how anyone wants it, but this is how the militaries of the world have functionally evolved and thats how they all are.
    .
    In our case everyone reaches to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel or a time scale Naik, but for the next rank – Colonel, about 60% will not be promoted by 16 years of service.
    .
    As for personnel below officer ranks – this is even steeper – most of our men are superseded by the age of 36, and then they have either to keep serving in lower ranks with meagre pays, or move out and explore other options, back home.
    .
    So by the 15 or 16 years of service, an officer or Junior officers or non commissioned officers – knows if he has any future in the organisation – is he rising to next rank or not.
    .
    The pensionable service for PBOR is thus fixed at 15 years and for officers at 20 years.
    .
    This ensured one good thing – the older ones moved out and made way for the new recruitments to happen.
    .
    It kept the water flowing and clean.
    .
    It helped Forces in a mission critical attribute – keeping the profile of our forces Young.
    .
    And its no brainer to understand why your armed forces should have young profile.
    .
    We are All Harmed
    .
    The recent Govt’s OROP Announcement is a work in a hurry and distinctly short sighted – and that will haunt Armed forces and Govts, for years to come.
    .
    This announcement of not applying the OROP to future PMR officers or men, will have a few far reaching repercussions.
    .
    Reduced Promotions – Since men who are overlooked for promotions cannot take PMR, they do not vacate the post for others. This will result in promotion avenues slowing down and drop drastically at every stage. Now where does this leave me and what am i thinking – ‘I cannot be promoted and if i opt out of the forces, I would not get OROP benefits. Best option for me is to stay on – for as long as possible and move out with best pension options’.
    .
    So with all senior ranks packed with numbers – the promotion queue, will keep getting slower.
    .
    Increased Frustration – This non promotion to next rank applies in every rank – Naiks, Havaldars, Naib Suberdars or Colonels, Brigadiers, Major Generals and so on. Larger stagnations at the bottom of pyramid and proportionate stagnation in senior ranks. Stagnation anywhere is bad for the morale & efficiencies of individuals and organisation. So moving out of personnel on PMR after a pensionable service, has always been a good thing to happen for Military. It created vacancies for promotion and allowed soldiers to explore their potential outside of Armed Forces. And that is the reason that allowing them to move out on pension ( and OROP) was always a win-win situation. This stands skewed now and we are heading towards a potentially disgruntled armed forces.
    .
    Lower Intake – Govt has not been able to fill critical shortage of junior officers since over many decades. In this hyper-connected world, the youth is aware of everything happening – the state of armed forces, the service conditions, the de-incentivisation drives and the insensitivity of the politicians and bureaucrats. Armed forces is a tough job – physically, mentally and financially – there is a sacrifice, beyond comprehension. The youth of today is quite aware of these difficulties and he has softer options. With this de-incentivisation and the could’t-care-less perception created, the numbers is bound to drop further.
    .
    I do not understand why Parrikar cannot stand up and say, “I know this is not OROP, but this is the best we can offer.” That would at least have the virtue of being honest. By insisting that what has been granted is OROP, which clearly it is not, the govt is just digging itself into a bigger and bigger hole and alienating some of its most ardent supporters.

  • Arzu

    RHR,
    You side stepped the thrust of my arguement.. forget the condemnation either by you or that Liar FF..
    .
    Indian liberals and pakistani liberals are not same same .. your battles are different , your are fighting probably for survival or basic rights on the contrary liar indian liberals are supported by constituion,institutions,historians and sixty years of rule post independence , they are fighting for undue advantage for some (mostly crimnals).

  • Arzu

    Masadi bhai,
    Some of your points are undeniable sir!

  • tajender
  • Mohan

    After Tarun Finger Tejpal – it is Hasan Pedophile Suroor .. The Liberal brigade has some reputation.

    .
    Columnist Hasan Suroor Arrested In The UK Following Sting By Anti-Paedophile Group
    .
    http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2015/11/11/hasan-suroor-video_n_8529978.html

  • tajender
  • RHR

    Mohan why you and Arzu hate liberals so much. I mean why are you assuming that Hassan Surroor and Tejpal are like that because of their liberalism?

    Any ways

    Happy Diwali!!

  • RHR,
    I am not stupid, I very well understand what these people are. I have problem with the people masquerade themselves as liberals, but in fact they are everything but liberals. I am still waiting for at least one ‘liberal’ journo to tweet about Hassan Suroor. If he was from BJP/RSS or a Modi supporter, all these journos would have bombarded twitter with thousands of tweets already.
    ..
    I have never compared you with any Indian liberal. I have immense respect for you to insult you by comparing with them. Thanks vm for the wishes and a very Happy Diwali to you too.

  • RHR

    Chalein aaj dewali ke din jam per jam hona chaiye

    Aaj tu mera bhee irada hai! Makers Mark peena ka.

    Arzu Bhai should also drink tonight…

    let’s celebrate!

  • Fingolfin

    Kaal, CM, HP, Gorki, Dada, RHR, Mohan, Arzu, Ranger and everyone on PTH
    .
    A very happy Diwali to you all. 🙂

  • RHR

    FF

    Yaar do see Abhinav’s article and give your thoughts on that

    happy diwali to you also

  • Happy Diwali to everyone and jam pe jam has already started see you guys, tomorrow.

  • UK police is arresting Hassan Suroor on the eve of PM Modi’s visit only to appease the intolerant BJP government. Dear Liberals, please discuss.

  • Maggi returns,
    LALU returns
    proves that no matter how poisonous you’re in the past, Indians will accept you. Still liberals are saying, Indians have become intolerant.

  • tajender

    
    Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic has paid his respects to Muslim victims of the 1995 Srebrenica massacre, during which over 8,000 men and boys were killed by Serbian forces.

    Vucic on Wednesday laid a wreath of white roses at Srebenica’s memorial, in the presence of the town’s Muslim mayor and Bosnian Muslim leader, Bakir Izetbegovic.

    There was a heavy police presence at the memorial and in the town on Wednesday for the premier’s visit.

    During a visit to the Bosnian capital, Sarajevo, earlier this month, Vucic called for improved ties between Serbs and Muslims, saying this was “crucial” for the stability in the volatile Balkans.

    In July 1995, Serbian death squads butchered over 8,000 Muslim Bosnian boys and men in Srebrenica in a few days, in the worst atrocity in Europe since World War II.

    The carnage took place after Bosnian Serbs ran over the Bosnian town, even though it was formally declared a UN-protected area.

    A Bosnian Muslim woman walks through the Potocari Memorial and Cemetery in Potocari on June 25, 2015. (AFP photo)Serb troops overran the zone despite the presence of hundreds of Western troops tasked with protecting innocent civilians.

    An international court later labeled the killings as genocide.

    Twenty years after the massacre, workers continue their excavations to dig up the victims’ bodies from hidden mass graves, and their job is made more difficult because those responsible for the massacre often retrieved the bodies and relocated them elsewhere to hide the crimes.

    In July, documents from the 1990s Bosnia war revealed that the US, Britain and France were behind the massacre.

    According to the investigation cited in a report by the UK-based daily The Guardian, British, American and French governments were prepared to cede UN-protected safe areas to armed Serb militants during the Bosnia war

  • tajender

    proves that no matter how poisonous you’re in the past

    for them he is still poisonous.for victims he is still messiah.

  • Sex crimes of Tejpal and Suroor don’t make them bad journalists – Tushar Gandhi

    Suroor was only planning to have Sex with Minor.He didn’t actually do it! #AdarshLiberals crawling out in support! https://t.co/9Y8LIm5xkY

  • tajender
  • tajender

    The Editor of Mysore Gazetteer Prof. Srikantaiah has listed 156 temples to which Tipu Sultan regularly paid annual grants.. markandy katju

    Mohan why you and Arzu hate liberals si much.

    hate is duty.tejpal may be womanizer but not near atal bihari bajpai,whose house was always crowded with sluts of delhi.read balraj madhok.

    टीपू सुल्तान के खिलाफ मराठा अंग्रेजों से मिलकर लड़े। फिर भी टीपू सुल्तान देशद्रोही और मराठा देशभक्त? गड़े मुर्दे उखाड़ने से कुछ नहीं निकलता

  • tajender

    Shukriya, Nawaz Sharif Sahab, for joining Diwali celebrations in Karachi. We Indians deeply appreciate your gesture twitter.com/nailainayat/st…

    sudhir kulkarni

  • posit

    Nawaz Sharif protecting hindus?
    But why does he not (and cannot) protect ahamadiyas, shias etc.?

    First the pakistanis exterminated hindus and now they are pretending to care for them and protect them.
    what big lies.

    Islam’s plan of exterminating non-muslims is taking strides forward.