GALLANTRY AWARDS – TOO MANY FOR TOO LITTLE

GALLANTRY AWARDS – TOO MANY FOR TOO LITTLE

By Maj Gen V.K. Singh

On 26^th January 2009, the Government of India announced the gallantry wards for the year 2008. There were 11 Ashoka Chakras, six of them for policemen who died during the Mumbai terror attack on 26/11. In addition, there were 13 Kirti Chakras and 30 Shaurya Chakras. The Ashok Chakra is awarded for the "most conspicuous bravery or some daring or pre-eminent valour or self-sacrifice" other than in the face of the enemy. It is the peace time equivalent of the Param Vir Chakra awarded to armed forces personnel during war. These awards are similar to the Victoria Cross (UK), the US Medal of Honor (USA), the Legion of Honor (France) and the Cross of St. George.(Russia).

The number of Ashoka Chakras awarded this year – eleven – is unprecedented. In the previous year, there was only one. Often, there is no award. The large number of awards this year has raised many questions. By giving away so many awards in a single year, are we not devaluing them? There is no doubt that most of the recipients lost their lives fighting terrorists. But should this alone qualify for the highest gallantry award?

The awards are given for the “most conspicuous bravery or some daring or pre-eminent valour or self-sacrifice". It is important to distinguish courage from valour. There are many activities that require a high degree of courage, such as sky diving, bungee jumping or motor racing. But those who indulge in such sports cannot be termed valorous or gallant, because the most important element – the enemy or the adversary – is missing. One cannot fight a battle if there is no enemy. And unless there is an enemy, his actions, however, courageous, cannot be termed gallant.  This distinction seems to have been missed while considering the awards in 2009. Perhaps the gentlemen who decided the awards had never heard of the battles of Saragarhi or Rezangla. If they had, they would have understood the meaning of gallantry.

The battle of Saragarhi was fought in 1897 in the North West Frontier, when a post held by 21 Sikhs of the 4th Battalion (then 36th Sikhs) of the Sikh Regiment was attacked by about 10,000 tribesmen. All 21 died fighting, refusing to surrender.  The battle of Rezangla was fought in 1962, when the Chinese attacked a post held by a company of 13 Kumaon in Chushul. All 114 men, mostly Ahirs from the Ahirawal region (now in Haryana), died in the battle. Both these battles are examples of valour in the face of the enemy. By any yard stick, each of these men deserved the Victoria Cross or the Param Vir Chakra. For Saragarhi, each one was given the Indian Order of Merit, since Indian soldiers were then not eligible for the VC. In Rezangla, only one PVC was awarded, to Major Shaitan Singh.

Thousands of Indian soldiers have died in battle since Independence. The number of PVCs awarded during the last 60 years gives an indication of the exclusiveness of the award. In 1947-48, in a campaign lasting more than a year, only five PVCs were awarded. In the Sino-Indian Conflict in 1962, there were only three. In the 1965 war with Pakistan, there were just two. In the 1971 war with Pakistan, there were four. In addition, one was awarded in Siachen, one in UN Operations and four for Kargil in 1999. In other words, only 20 PVCs have been awarded in more than 60 years, during which the Indian Army fought four major wars.

One reason for the dilution of the civilian gallantry wards is the lack of multi-level screening that takes place in the case of military awards. A very small percentage of the total number who are recommended ultimately get the awards, due to the rigorous screening process at various formation headquarters. In the Mumbai terrorist attack, the Police Commissioner of Mumbai recommended no less than 14 policemen for the Ashoka Chakra! If these recommendations had been properly screened, setting aside political considerations, the number of Ashoka Chakras would not have been so large. For the Padma series of awards, extraneous factors such regionalism, media hype and politics are perhaps unavoidable, but it is important that they should not be allowed to play a part when deciding gallantry awards. Unless this is done, these  awards will end up being devalued, as has happened in 2009.

28 Jan 2009