All my encounters with Gen VK Singh were via his discourses in the media. Even tonight, it wasn’t a one-on-one, but a large gathering by lawyer RK Anand to announce a new book, “Assault on Merit: The Untold Story of Civil-Military Relations”.
 
As the title would obliquely suggest, Anand brought to light a series of “assaults” he has led on behalf of disgruntled generals of our army and on the rare occasion, the government too; one wonders about the latter, because in one brief he refused to say anything on behalf of the Union and his client went along despite a forewarning! Other cases predictably related to three-star generals, including Lt Gen Raj Kadyan, seated in tonight’s Ashoka Hotel audience, a man who I had interviewed some years back after his own bitter, bare-it-all book.
 
 
With the house at his command, Anand predictably left very few details unstated in at least 12 cases, where, as he saw it, gross mismanagement and machinations of the South Block civilian had been inflicted. What surprised me no end was how a serving army chief sat through the diatribe and those of every single speaker before him; also, in his own finale to the speeches, he didn’t raise the slightest objection. I saw inherent moral cooption in Gen Singh’s silence.
 
If you thought this could be the good general’s civility (no pun intended!) and he didn’t wish to confront an author, who he no doubt knows beyond familiarity, hear this. The general features in the “Assault” vide an “interview” granted to one Kunal Verma, described in the aforementioned book as “contributor”. To explain the inverted commas under “interview”, this isn’t what we normally understand as interview. No questions have been printed, only Gen Singh’s quotes are used, alleging a major mess in army promotions from the rank of brigadier onwards, because unlike what happens during promotions up to colonel, the civilian authority gets a finger in the pie from major general onwards.
 
Two simple questions arise from this unorthodox “interview.” First, direct questioning of civilian authority (long settled in the rules of business, 1961, duly attacked tonight by defence analyst Maroof Raza) has been stated while Gen Singh is still on the chief’s chair. Can he, a serving army chief, openly question civilian authority? That too in the formal contours of a book, relevant portions of which he must have sought “play back”, from Har-Anand, the publisher?
 
If this isn’t insubordination, here’s more: the sitting army chief told his fawning audience, many of them folks from the fauj, that he wants all generals to be subjected to 360-degree evaluation. This, I pre-empt, may look reasonable given our liberal sensitivities polished by corporate practices. But asking jawans in thousands to evaluate their colonel, or colonels, in turn, to have a place in the annual confidential report of their general is a recipe for anarchy. Do we expect aspiring generals to look for votes? A stronger government would have cautioned a general from going public over such an idea. I wonder what the Intelligence Bureau said.
 
Let me confess here that until this evening I was a vocal supporter of Gen Singh against the injustice handed out to him. Yes, he made a mistake while filling out his form at the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) and wrote 1950 as his date of birth instead of 1951. The reference document for any such assertion has to remain one’s matriculation certificate. To prove this point: wouldn’t that have been the reference document if the young boy at that time had written 1952 instead? Thus, I’ve always argued that when Gen Singh’s matric certificate says “1951” there seems little reason to penalize him with a retirement on May 31, 2012, under the garb that as per his UPSC form he’s turned 62 in May, 2012.
 
But tonight, as Gen Singh sat in silent agreement with speeches of Anand and Verma, and we heard a reading of a private letter of support written by former minister of state for defence Arun Singh to the book’s editor Inderjit Badhwar, and Raza’s articulate sabre rattle against babus and netas, I felt his age controversy has clouded our man’s ability to look beyond his own injustice.
 
Three quick facts to support this:
 
a)   Gen Singh claimed to us in the audience that he hasn’t read Anand’s book. This, given the apparent participation cited above, the use of the word “assault” in the title and the give-away press statement denying any connection between “Assault” and the general’s age row, was a bit difficult for me to believe. Even the distracted army memsahibs out there wouldn’t believe it.
b)  After collusive silence over direct questioning of the political class and civil service structure, which incidentally is part of the constitutional scheme, the general decided to speak to over 75 media persons in the room and launched a tirade against his present obsession Lt Gen Dalbir Singh Suhaag, a man in line to be his grand successor on the army chief’s chair, but suffering a charge sheet from the anti-hero of this column. The anger was unbecoming.
c)   Finally, even as he jostled with reporters during the long march in the corridors of the Ashoka to reach his 4-star ambassador car, the chief did strange things. He heckled the defence correspondent of Headlines Today thrice, taunting him about running a tirade against him despite being a defence officer’s son. Did India’s army chief, in full view of cameras, have to repeatedly fold his hands in mocking respect before the young man, loudly complaining how his channel has hammered him?
 
I may be the millionth person worrying about what the jawan freezing in Siachen feels about this sort of circus, but I must. The general needs to cool down. If he doesn’t, I’ll be glad if the government had the conviction to send him under MFN to the army of our western neighbour. Islamabad deserves him. Gen Singh has a career there, at least in his deeply disturbed condition.
 
(Twitter handle: @therohitbansal)