Veterans could have opted for a socially constructive line of approach in their demand for OROP, writes BD MISHRA
This writer is a pre-Sino-Indian war vintage infantry officer and has observed the entire one-rank-one-pension issue and agitation. The demand for OROP, by Indian Armed Forces retirees, was more than justified. The inordinate delay in its acceptance, therefore, gave a reason to the ex-Servicemen to feel vexed and restive.
The demand for OROP implies that a defence personnel, with the same rank and same length of service, be entitled to a uniform pension, irrespective of the date of his/her retirement. This demand has a distant geography, long history, varied chemistry and wide-ranging reaction from within the veteran community and also outside.
Geographically, a somewhat similar call, known as the bonus demand, was made by military veterans in the United States, after World War I. In India, the demand for OROP started with an anguish among the military veterans, subsequent to the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission in 1973, when the pension of the retired personnel was reduced from 70 per cent of the last pay drawn to 50 per cent, while the pension of the civilian Government employees was increased from 30 per cent to 50 per cent.
The timing of this drastic downward revision of pension added fuel to the fire. It was done shortly after the Indian Armed Forces achieved a decisive victory over the Pakistan Army in erstwhile east Pakistan, capturing over 90,000 Pakistani prisoners of war and creating a new nation, Bangladesh.
The inflationary impact of the successive Pay Commission brought increasing financial difficulties to the military veterans. A majority of the defence personnel, retiring in their late 30s and early 40s, with growing family responsibilities, faced serious pecuniary constraints. Thus, in the early 80s, the demand for OROP, which was seen as a big hope for a better future, became a mass rallying point for millions of military veterans and war widows.
The beginning of the OROP movement with appeals, signature campaigns in blood and the heart-breaking return of gallantry medals to the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, the President of India, was in the right direction. But their demand was insensitively ignored. Fortunately, in the run-up to the 2014 lok Sabha election, things changed and the demand was earnestly taken by BJP's prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi.
Mr Modi declared his support for the demand of OROP at a mammoth ex-Servicemen rally at Rewari in Haryana. He promised to implement the OROP, if voted to power. Sadly, after Mr Modi's announcement, the issue was politicised by the UPA Government which was then in power, which allocated a paltry sum of Rs500 crore, in an attempt to garner votes. Mr Modi, after winning an absolute majority in the elections, repeated his commitment to grant the demand for the OROP in his Independence Day speech from the ramparts of Red Fort.
Undoubtedly, military veterans are held in high esteem in our country. People have faith and confidence in the jawans' gallantry and their will to sacrifice for the security and welfare of the nation. The common man endorses the democratic right of the veterans to demand an optimum compensation and welfare measure from the state, but he also expects that they maintain discipline, decorum, and a dignified frontier. One does not mind thedharnas of striking groups of Government servants and other union-bound wage-earners, but it becomes uneasy if the veterans engage in such agitation. It is in this context that the agitation by the ex-Servicemen at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi, merits an evaluation, although the OROP demand has been met, albeit with some caveats.
As it stands today, many veterans feel that they should have gone about the demand differently and earned the support and admiration of society and the Government of the day, by setting a new model of demand — projection through meaningful social service. The management of OROP should have had a socially constructive line of approach. The military veterans were disciplined, educated, brave, bold, tough and hardworking, but they should not have taken to the streets.
Under the bold banner of OROP, the veterans could have galvanised people for the Swachch Bharat Abhiyan. The doctors, with OROP band around their arms, could have started medical check-up camps and other healthcare programmes. Military veterans from the Armed Forces technical services, with bold OROP-embossed Gandhi caps on their heads, could have rendered technical help to the administration by providing free quality service in mechanical, electrical, legal, postal, police and public transport and supply departments.
OROP-demanding veterans, spread far and wide, in large numbers, in towns and cities, could have, without exception, immortalised for themselves the goodwill and an everlasting gratitude of the nation.
There is a strong feeling that the OROP movement went astray. The veterans have lost their halo of being a cut above the rest. Though somewhat late, the convenors of the OROP agitation may, for the sake of the larger reputation of the veterans, like to think of a mid-course correction and change the format of the residual OROP movement.
(The writer is a retired Army officer)