The battle for cantonment roads: civilian versus army The Quint 27 May 18
It began with Secunderabad, where the Local Military Authority (LMA) shut multiple roads for use by civilians residing in colonies located around the cantonment. In some cases, it led to commuters covering an additional distance of seven Kms. Angered residents created multiple social organizations to challenge the authority of the LMA and the powers of the Secunderabad Cantonment Board.
Requests, commencing from Secunderabad and followed by others, on closure of roads and additional checks being imposed on entry into cantonments, were forwarded to the defence minister. The MoD sought details from all cantonment boards on the subject. Cantonment boards are headed by members of the Defence Estates Organization (DEO), but function under guidelines of the LMA. There is always a tussle between the two. DEO representatives have been at the centre of most land scams in cantonment lands. Their replies were bound to be biased.
Post an analysis the MoD issued directions reversing local orders on 21st May. The directions stated that all roads which were partially/ fully closed, would reopen. Barriers/check posts and road blocks would be removed. Traffic would be monitored for a month and a review done thereafter, implying nothing would be done. There were certain exceptions, based on immediate security threats, mainly in J and K. The directions also restricted authority for emergent closure in the future. Management of traffic would be the responsibility of LMA and civil police assistance could be sought for the same.
In most towns, Secunderabad, Delhi, Pune and Kanpur, residential colonies have grown around the cantonments. Older cantonments have markets and schools within and these are invariably accessible. Residents of colonies around the cantonment have preferred cantonment roads as these are clean, well maintained and lit, as also have limited traffic. When these are closed for prolonged durations, anger sets in and this results in friction.
Therefore, closure of roads had become a flash point between the army and civil society. Videos emerging on social media displayed residents questioning jawans on duty, passing insulting remarks and seeking to divide the rank and file. All this while the jawan on duty stood silent, smiling and firm. In Secunderabad, the organizations created by residents apart from being active on social media, also interacted with local political figures, seeking to convey the message of reopening of roads to the MoD.
Most of the older cantonments have existed since pre-independence. These cantonments are large and have within them multiple military establishments, some large, some small, alongside residential accommodation and schools. These are also spread in penny pockets throughout the cantonment. A few of them house families of military personnel posted along the border or battling insurgencies.
Most of the families who live in this accommodation are neither from the state, nor speak the local language, but are compelled to stay, either for the education of their children or because they have no other place to go. It is nigh impossible to provide all pockets with any reasonable sense of security. One of the methods of enhancing security is to restrict movement of non-military personnel through few avenues, thus limiting areas which need to be covered in strength.
The civil society, simply because of the additional inconvenience was unwilling to accept the fact that the army has adopted this action for the purposes of security, not for pleasure nor to put the local population to inconvenience. There have been questions from many in civil society, why should the army fear civilians, after all we are also Indians and have high regard for the army. What is missed out is that an anti-national element, seeking to strike at army morale also masquerades as a local resident, moves with the masses, plants bombs or strikes a residential colony, which is all open and unprotected.
A militant strike in a cantonment impacts national prestige, hence each LMA has as his responsibility the security of the cantonment. Lack of funds preclude construction of walls and fences with high security gadgets which exist in almost all civil residential colonies. With family accommodation spread across the cantonment, lack of security, lack of checks and free movement within, would increase crime, especially against families who reside alone. Lifting the checks which kept anti-nationals and criminals away as has been ordered by the MoD would only add to risks.
While the army could be justified in its stand that the closure was for security purposes, however it failed to correctly convey its directions and decisions. It could have interacted with members of affected colonies and sought to evolve a workable solution. It may not have comprehended the problems being faced by those residing around the cantonment and could have considered reducing the number of roads which it had decided to close. No matter what option it would have adopted, there would always be disgruntled elements seeking to question the same.
The army also failed to realize that it neither has the support of its own ministry or its own populace, who are more concerned about their distances of travel and the ministry of its votes. By announcing unilaterally, the lifting of all restrictions, the government may have gained a few votes, but lost far more from the serving and veterans, who have only seen their interests ignored by the present regime.
As incidents of crime in cantonments increase or in the event of a terror strike, the same minister and her staff would run to blame the army, rather than assume responsibility for reversing a security decision, without taking considered views from all affected parties.
This direct reversal was also indicative of the lack of trust that the defence minister has on army hierarchy or was she seeking to convey a message that she cares a damn for their rank, authority or power. She took the advice of the DEO but failed to understand the army viewpoint. Logically the MoD should have left the decision to army commanders or the level they consider suitable for review, rather than unilaterally reversing it, without being aware of ground realities.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army