Did Rawat speak for himself or Sitharaman on Cantonment Roads? The Quint 15 Jun 18
In a press conference two days ago, the army chief General Bipin Rawat supported the opening of cantonment roads. He stated, ‘If a road is being planned for a particular civil area, should we close it and think we are above everyone else’. He quoted two examples. The first example he gave was of walking plaza’s which exist in select cantonments and are open for everyone, including local public.
In the case of walking plazas, the roads are shut for two hours in the morning and evening, to encourage walkers from all over the city. In Lucknow, there are more civilian than army walkers on the road in the morning and evening. Walking plazas are very popular. There has never been any hinderance to those residing on these roads, nor for those visiting. They are always permitted to move but are required to drive slowly, the right of way remains with the walkers and children playing.
The second example he gave was of Pune where there was a communal graveyard, the shortest route for which was through the cantonment. Realizing that it was inconveniencing the local public the road was opened. He concluded his comments while stating, ‘You are irritating people by closing roads. If you have to manage security, then manage it. Right now, you have a false sense of security when you feel you are secured in a closed environment. We can’t put civilians away. People will start becoming hostile.’
These are words which have been welcomed by the public, mainly those residing in Secunderabad. Immediately there were comments from the city that 14 more roads have yet to be opened and demands for opening those roads rose.
Did the chief speak on his own accord or was he requested to do so by the minister, who has been facing flak from every direction on her blanket decision to open all roads. By having the army chief speak, the defence minister would have hoped to offset some flak which she has been facing since then, from both the serving and veteran community. Any statement by the chief was expected to reduce tempers and possibly put the minds of the serving at rest.
Analysing the chief’s comments would clearly indicate that it was not made of his own free will but done at the behest of a beleaguered defence minister. Being a responsible officer, he would never admit, but the comments and examples are clearly indicative. It is also possible that he was asked a specific question, to which for the first time, be gave a generic answer, without directions nor clarity.
No road in Secunderabad has been planned for a ‘particular civil area’ as the chief stated. They are all army roads, made for the army’s use, which are being been exploited as builders have created colonies around the cantonments. Hence the army has not shut any civil road, which has ‘been planned for a particular area’. Hence his words do not imply that the army will open closed roads, since none were planned for ‘a particular area’.
The entire community of Secunderabad, which is fighting for the opening of the roads has never once quoted the high court judgement of 2014, which has legally authorised the army to close roads, which it desires for security purposes, while tasking the municipal authority to construct alternate ones. It has neither been mentioned by the army chief, nor the defence minister.
Walking plazas would and should continue to exist, as they benefit all communities of the city, not the army community. There has been no decision to close any.
Further, the chief is also aware of the problems of families residing alone. He knows that their security cannot be overlooked. Since management of security within a cantonment is the responsibility of the Local Military Authority (LMA), it cannot be overruled. He never stated that all roads must open, despite where they lead and through which areas they transit. That has been left to conjecture and discretion of the LMA.
It is only post the unilateral decision taken by the defence minister to open all cantonments has there been an increase in hostility against the army, as stated by the chief. Opening all roads, without even basic checks, has added to anger within the service, which has been carefully avoided by the army chief in his comments. He gave an example of Pune, clearly avoiding roads which are under dispute or being requested to be opened.
Thus, while local authorities would feel that the army chief has given a blanket direction to open all roads, it is not so. He gave comments which were general, neither binding nor forceful. His examples were also equally generic. This was the least forceful of all his press conferences, in which he always speaks with conviction and clarity. It clearly emerges that the chief spoke, because the defence minister, visualizing a political fallout of her hasty decision, is seeking to deflect some anger, which could impact vote banks away.
Hence, for those hoping that his comments would open all roads, may be expecting too much. Even the defence minister’s belief that the chief’s comments would reduce anger of the serving and veterans may not happen.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army