STF na Mídia - MyClipp

The Economic Times/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Has General V K Singh killed hope for
reforms?
General Vijay Kumar Singh is no ordinary wielder of
the officer's baton. A man with a keen intellect, Singh's
ability to endure odds are almost folklore in the army -
even as a young officer, he was much admired for his
skills in making the impossible, possible.
Many years ago, Singh was handpicked for the 61-day
Rangers Course of the US Army, perhaps the world's
toughest combat course where cadets are forced to
starve and stay awake for days, and where even the
toughest ones give up.
The first time he tried, Singh, too, said enough is
enough, after falling ill. But he stayed back. In the next
attempt, he was adjudged the best trainee. That
explains why he went on to become the only Indian to
be inducted into the Hall of Fame of the US Army War
College.
Without doubt, Singh, India's 26th chief of army staff, is
a born fighter. But, for all his outstanding qualities, he
is hogging the limelight for the wrong reasons. And the
controversy in which he is the key player throws up
very pertinent questions about our civil-military ties.
Good Start
He started off as a man with a mission. When Singh
assumed office in 2010, there were high expectations
of him cleaning up the dirt in the system. His initial
comments on the army's "internal health" offered much
hope: "For any organisation to do well, it must ensure
that the internal health is good."
His no-nonsense stance on Adarsh and Sukhna scams
also went down well with those who wanted the army
purged of factionalism and corruption. After his
predecessor Deepak Kapoor's lacklustre tenure,
overshadowed by numerous graft charges, Singh was
seen as a reformer, someone who would, as defence
analysts put it, "de-colonise and modernise structures".
He also introduced steps to ensure the welfare of
non-officers in an entity largely biased in favour of
officers.
The RTI on Age
And then an Right to Information ( RTI) petition landed
up at the army headquarters in October 2010,
requesting details of Singh's date of birth. The army
headquarters obtained a legal opinion, and claimed
that it was May 10, 1951 -which clashed with the
official document with the Ministry of Defence which
said May 10, 1950.
Surprisingly, the chief, too, argued for 1951, and in an
unprecedented act, went to the Supreme Court.
Soon, the age row was destined to destroy the rapport
he enjoyed with bureaucrats - and also with the
soft-spoken defence minister, AK Antony. The
government contested Singh's claim, saying he had
previously accepted 1950 as his year of birth.
Everyone knows what followed.
Call it an irony, but the ultra-professional Singh got
trapped in his own personal battle, ruining not only his
reputation but also that of the army. Interestingly, it
was also an outcome of skewed decision-making
structures at the army HQ. General JJ Singh, who was
army chief in 2006 when the issue first cropped up,
should have solved the issue, but didn't.
139