Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Views by col Manjit sodhi

From: Manjeet Sodhi

To: Kamboj Chander

Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 3:27 PM
Subject: A Point of View on Action Required going Forward

A Point of View on Action Required going Forward
Dear Colleagues and Friends,

A lot of time and E Mails have been exchanged lately on the wisdom (or otherwise) of the advisory to vote for BJP. Many forget that this advisory was issued by the IESM Core group only after the UPA (Congress) Govt did not accept our legitimate demand of OROP and even stated in Parliament that it was not feasible on `legal, administrative and financial reasons’. Which meant that they had no intention to open that issue after they had made that statement in Parliament.

There was a need for the ESM community to show their disappointment (which we did by Fasts until death and Relay fasts as also various Demonstrations in the Jantar Mantar area). These were coupled by similar demonstrations in various cities including Bangalore etc and by a spate of articles by various ex-servicemen in print media and on TV. If the Govt of the day is not willing to concede the legitimate demands of a Group, what avenues are open to a Group than protests and media articles? The right to vote is the legitimate right of every citizen and members of a group have every right to vote for a party which is likely to support the interests of that particular Group. Hence the `advisory to vote for BJP was definitely wise and appropriate’.

With the Congress now being the largest party, we should approach the new UPA / Congress Govt for a fresh look at our demand of OROP. The Chairperson of the Congress should now be approached once again. The Chairman IESM may now formally ask the new Defence Minister that IESM should be included in any Commission constituted by the Govt on pension related issues of the ESM community. If the new Govt is prepared to offer say OROP less Rs 1 (as was done by the NDA after the Fifth Pay Commision?) we should accept the same. But if the new Govt is not willing to offer anything approaching OROP but is bent on trying to divide the ESM community using some `pliable’ organizations, then IESM should NOT accept any such decision.

I apprehend that if AK Antony is again appointed as the Defence minister (a distinct possibility) we may face a `khundak’ response. I for one am not as sanguine as Col Paranjpe that the new Govt will not adopt a `khundak’ approach. As Staff College and common sense teaches us to prepare for the `worst eventuality / response’ our contingency planning must be based on this premise. Our NDA / IMA training teaches us to look after the interests of our subordinates and interests of PBOR (as ably articulated by Sub Maj (Hony Lt) Kamleshwar Pandey) must form the Core of the demands that IESM projects to the new Govt. If we get a `khundak’ response, we should be prepared to :
(a) Restart and Continue our protests in the Jantar Mantar area.


(b) Approach the BJP and any MP with familial ties to the ESM community (e.g. the wife of Capt Amrinder Singh) and try to put up pressure from within the parliament. The ruling party should not be left in any illusion but should be told repeatedly that the ESM community is `unhappy’ with the deal that has been given to them so far.


(c) Project our demand for OROP in the Courts - for which the Naval Association may be asked to take the lead.


(d) Simultaneously we should project our point of view to every serving `service chief’ so that they can `prepare the ground’ from within the organization.
I feel that as an organization we in the IESM are indeed lucky to have a group of selfless and capable persons at our helm of affairs. In my long Army service I have come across only 4 persons who had PVSM, AVSM, VSM decorations. Perhaps there are not more than say 50 such persons in all three services combined from amongst the over say 3 Lacs retired and serving officers combined of all three services. I think it should be obvious that any person who has such a string of decorations is at the least `capable and effective’. We are also lucky to have a Vice Chairman IESM who having been a member of the Fourth and Fifth Pay commissions brings a lot of `subject matter expertise’ besides being an effective speaker (as seen by many of us in Jantar Mantar). Pravesh Ranjen is a Course mate and definitely a dedicated and capable person. There are many others in the IESM Core Group who are contributing in their own ways (e.g. Cdr Sharan Ahuja with his enrollment drives and Brig Kamboj, a definitely very capable and selfless person). With a team like this we cannot go wrong. It is indeed very petty on the part of some to ascribe motives to them for having issued the voting advisory for `political reasons’.

I feel we should continue to have FULL faith in our IESM Core Group and ask them to lead in the battle for OROP.

With best wishes,

Manjeet Sodhi
Col (Retd) (Signals)