As compared to any other organization in the country, the armed forces are the only ones without a voice. They have no means of venting their unhappiness on government decisions to those that matter, no union to support their demands, nor any right to protest, while wearing the uniform. Their top hierarchy can only raise its voice and request the government through interactions and notes, but do little if the government is unrelenting. These silent warriors only have their veterans, who having shared the pains and difficulties of service, understand their constraints and have become their public voice.
The culture of silence and discipline ingrained while in service tends to remain within an individual even post his retirement. Hence open protests by veterans are rare. In most cases he continues to behave responsibly and disciplined. Even in the OROP protests, there was a large community, which felt that agitating is incorrect by veterans and legal action is the option. Hence, the long-drawn agitation took time before it gained momentum, solely because a cultural change was essential amongst the veteran community.
Once it gained momentum, then there was nothing stopping the enthusiasm, till the initial release of OROP. Most participants quit after the initial release because they felt the government had acted, despite its remaining half-baked.
Even at the peak of the agitation, there was no violence, no insults to the government, solely cries of demanding rights and ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’, in complete contrast to the behaviour visible in assemblies, parliament or in other protests. The visuals in the media of aged veterans being manhandled by police or of surrendering their medals, which every soldier considers most dear, hurt sentiments across the nation and compelled the government to act.
The agitation was aimed at resolving pension issues of not only present veterans but also of generations of serving and future soldiers, as every soldier of today is a potential veteran of tomorrow. Hence, the agitators, protested not solely for themselves, but for the tomorrow of those now in service. The military was never criticized, despite claims of non-involvement of its hierarchy.
However, in recent times, there has been a marked change in the commenting by veterans on social media. Critical comments against the service, at times even based on fake content, have been on the rise. A recent case where social media became a battle ground was the Gogoi incident, where there were clearly two opposing veteran groups, one for and the other critical of the service. The other was the helicopter crash in Arunachal, post which the remains of the deceased, were initially lifted and brought to the base in cardboard boxes.
While the army termed it as an aberration and the few who have served in the area understood the difficulties in rescuing in such terrain, some veterans ignoring sane voices, were extremely critical and accused the army of insensitivity, ignoring the fact that the armed forces respect’s its martyrs and treats each one with dignity and honour. The honour provided once the remains were in the base and beyond was ignored.
This increased unwanted criticism has become a norm. Many, when questioned, state that it is a means of advising the armed forces to improve, while enhancing awareness amongst the public. There are some who are permanently critical because they bear a personal grudge against the organization. The media is only too happy when such differences crop up and seek to play one group against the other on national channels. The critiques may gain media glare, but their negative comments have impacts.
Social media being open, is regularly injected with comments from forces inimical to the nation, seeking to impact morale. These when circulated with added adverse comments, spread faster even within the serving community, causing greater harm than good. On many occasions there have even been comments stating that the service chiefs should resign, in case the armed forces are not granted their due, without understanding that such an action is tantamount to mutiny, unheard of in independent India, an action which would damage its reputation forever.
The veterans are always a respected community within the armed forces family. Their experience and contribution has been respected by the organization, if not the government. The present young generation look upto them as mentors. They must realize that it is the service which has made them what they are today, respected members of the community and would continue to care for them, solely because they sacrificed their youth for the service of the nation.
If they profess a negative outlook, continue criticizing the service, rather than supporting it, they project a poor image of the military and its hierarchy amongst the public and within the serving community. It also impacts those seeking to join it as a career. The serving community is also on social media, though not as active participants, but observe and are influenced. Spreading malicious content enhances internal cohesion.
Hence veterans as a community need to understand their role in impacting the minds of the serving. Positive approach builds confidence and trust into the system, negative outlook erodes the same. The more senior the veteran, the more positive and advisory should be his role, after all he may be a role model for many. Wrong or negative actions should be gently criticized, as the incident may not have been intentional, but accidental. A positive veteran community would enhance service prestige, while a negative one would degrade it, in the public eye.
Also missing is the media cells of the services. Once malicious content is identified on social media, they need to step in and clarify if it is false. Silence on their part adds to the damage. They are aware, however have not been granted freedom to act by the hierarchy. Unless this is done, malicious posts on social media would continue spreading, harming the reputation of the military, both outside and within.