Every military campaign is fraught with dangers. The Russian army finds it in a mess it cannot jiggle out of. We should think twice before any adventurism in POK.

Nine months on into the conflict in Ukraine, with its reputation and capabilities in tatters, the Russian Armed Forces are just hanging on by the skin of their teeth, hoping that the winter will allow them a badly needed reprieve to reorganise. One cannot help but wonder as to how they found themselves in such dire circumstances, despite a decade of reforms and modernisation.

Clearly, much of the responsibility for the utter disaster that has ensued and the difficult predicament Russia finds itself in, must rest with Putin. However, it is utterly inconceivable that he acted without the advice, support and acquiescence of the military hierarchy. Though many of the missteps may be attributable to faulty intelligence assessments, the responsibility for the military’s non-performance rests squarely on the senior hierarchy of the Russian Armed Forces. Their obvious incompetence, lack of leadership skills and professional acumen, and the corruption that has been laid bare are without parallel. Yet, they are the lucky ones, given that Stalin executed Generals for much less.

It is standard practice in all countries that selection of the military’s top leadership is overseen and approved at the highest political level, as it should be. Where autocracies and totalitarian regimes differ from democracies is in the necessity for them to give primacy to ideology or loyalty to the Supreme Leader even at the cost of professionalism. This lack is bound to percolate to lower levels over time and while it ensures the leadership remains unchallenged in the normal course of events, its consequences in a conflict can be devastating as has been the case with the Russians.

This is why nations intent on maintaining professionally competent militaries ensure that politics and the military always remain at arm’s length and follow selection criteria that are transparent and consistent. This used to be the case with us as well, but the process has unfortunately been eroded over the past few years. Best exemplified by the manner in which a retired officer was promoted and appointed Chief of Defence Staff with minor tweaking of rules, contrary to longstanding regulations on the subject.

Its impact can be seen from the manner in which an Army Commander allegedly attempted to curry favour with the powers that be, by parroting the Raksha Mantri’s call for the recapture of POK. A proposal that would not only put our troops in harm’s way, with no certainty of success and with little to commend it. Of course, it is quite possible that the Army Commander’s off-the-cuff remarks may have been misinterpreted or misconstrued, as some very knowledgeable commentators aver, and should not be taken at face value.

Be that as it may, there is no denying the fact that our military leadership has shown little spine in standing up for long cherished traditions and customs that have served us well since Independence and even before. The fact that there has been absolutely no opposition publicly by our military leadership against a completely ill-conceived initiative that is the Agnipath Scheme, conceived and pushed through by those with little knowledge or experience in the military, speaks volumes and damages their professional reputation and credibility.

Clearly, any scheme tailored to make semi-trained “contract labour” the cutting edge of our forces will reduce it to an ill-trained discordant militia is not in doubt. They will, in the long run, dominate the ranks of the military and be no different from what passes for soldiers in the Russian Armed Forces! We cannot afford to be so obdurate as to not see what any comparison between the Russian and Ukrainian Armed Forces makes crystal clear, the immense value of high- quality manpower.

Similarly, in the altercation in Arunachal, where the Chinese attempted to use overwhelming force to occupy our Post on the Yangtse Plateau, using batons and riot gear suggests they were confident, and correctly so, that we would not open fire, whatever be the provocation, for fear of escalating matters. Interestingly, they had little hesitation in opening fire, albeit in the air, when under pressure. It suggests they have little respect for joint agreements, signed to preserve peace and tranquillity along the LAC, which in any case have lost credibility following their aggressive actions in Eastern Ladakh. It is high time our military commanders stopped hedging and stood firm, allowing use of all means at our disposal to prevent casualties, especially in situations which cannot be considered to be mere patrol clashes.

We were able to turn tables on the attacking Chinese thanks to the alertness of our troops and the timely action taken to reinforce the post. All of this would have gone to naught if our troops had not been well- trained, disciplined, resolute, courageous and aggressive in their actions. To believe that at some future date Agniveers will act in a similar manner and win the day for us, appears to be foolish and farfetched, but then it seems there are those amongst us, who still believe in Santa Claus.

(The author, a military veteran, is a Visiting Fellow with the Observer Research Foundation and Senior Visiting Fellow with The Peninsula Foundation, Chennai. The views expressed are personal)