Several veterans are not aligned with the government's announcement of the Agnipath scheme for youths to be recruited for four years with no post-retirement benefits.
With the intention of making the armed forces young, energetic and modern, the Narendra Modi government on Tuesday announced the Agnipath scheme for youths to be recruited for four years with no post-retirement benefits.
The government has hailed the decision by saying that the scheme is a transformative reform which will enhance the combat potential of the forces, with a younger profile and technologically-adept soldiers.
Also Read: AGNIPATH scheme launched: Armed Forces to get 45000 new 'Agniveers'
As per the government, the scheme would offer an opportunity to draw from the vast pool of talent available in the country so that they can serve in their nation's armed forces with pride.
However, several veterans are not aligned with the government's steps. Asianet Newsable spoke to some of them.
Major General Yash Mor (Retd)
Defence expert
"This is a non-implementable scheme. It will take at least 6 months to recruit the first cadet. There are a lot of issues with human resources, and training and just calling them Agniveer and Agnipath will not do. It is a disaster the day nation starts looking at military recruitment from the point of view of economic savings.
"How would you judge which 25 per cent to be absorbed and which 75 per cent to be sent back? There is no parameter and four years is too short. We cannot provide them with specialisation or training. So we will have thousands of young people out in the streets, totally disgruntled. After four years, they cannot go back to college and study. They cannot upskill themselves and no one would skill them up in the forces. It is only for say.
Also Read: Here's how India's future-ready soldier would look like
"It looks to be a very big HR failure in the long run. There will be a negative impact on the forces. They will be viewed from a different angle. Can we deploy them on secret duty or can they be given confidential tasks?"
"Once we throw them out of the force after four years, what will be their loyalty to the defence establishment, which has not taken them back. So I would say from the security, morale, training, and HR points of view it is a non-implementable task. For specialised units like armoured, mechanised, EME, signal, infantry, engineers and air defence, they need seven-eight years to get some kind of specialisation.
"On youths who are awaiting call letters, there are no words for them. They should have been inducted first and are already part of the process for the last two-and-a-half years. Today, you mark my word. They are saying that the first recruitment will be held within 90 days, but I am saying it will take 180 days to recruit the first cadet.
"It is not some Bollywood movie being made... bombed out of the screen carrying an AK-47... getting snapped. It's not good. The very sad thing you could see is that it was forced upon them (forces)."
Major General BS Dhanoa (Retd)
Defence expert
"Conceived and being implemented with cost-cutting in mind, Agnipath may turn out to be a change-inducing catalyser to larger reforms needed in a 21st-century military. If our top brass and political leaders are capable of looking beyond short-term gains, we may still achieve a lot."
"Constructive criticism is not treason. Everyone survives upheavals in organisations. Those who have served in uniform are passionate about their times in an exceptional environment. Do not denigrate or ignore people who have a nation's interests at heart.
"Is a man at 23-24 years healthier and fitter than one at say 28-30? The best years of a fit youth are between 21-35. Muscle strength peaks at around 25 years but the body stays healthy and strong up to 35 years and even into the early 40s. So this argument of a fitter military doesn't hold.
"Whether a pipeline is four years long or 15, the quantum going in and out annually, eventually, is the same. Any management guru would recommend that to make the best use of the intake, keep the longer pipeline ticking over. It need not be disrupted every 4 years. Why not at 7, 10 or 12?
"I don’t know what exactly was wrong with the current recruitment and training policy that the new one, which is so transformative, is all about upskilling? We have been unable to upskill and provide firm second employment opportunities to those superannuating thus far.
"Too much emphasis on providing skills to youth in the forthcoming armed forces' HR intake changes. Real skills would be acquired by those who go on to don the uniform a little longer. On one hand, the training is for six months only, the rest would be taken up in routine deployment. Give me a skilled technician over a patriotic one any day.
"Professional militaries usually do not run employment schemes."
Lt Gen Vinod Bhatia (Retd)
Former DGMO
"Death knell for armed forces; untested, no pilot project conducted -- straight implementation. It will lead to the militarization of society. Nearly 40,000 (75%) youth year-on-year rejected and dejected without a job, semi-trained in arms ex-Agniveers. Not a good idea. No one gains.
"Indian soldier costs minimum but delivers the maximum. When we look at money, we also see value for money. Let us not create an irreversible and avoidable turmoil and turbulence with two adversaries conjoined to trouble us. First test bed proposal, then implement."