Dear Members,
Extract of 061 IG dated 05 March 09 is reproduced below.This IG covers the entitlement of Veterans Pension and is for the benefit of all pensioners (pre and post 01 Jan 06). Information regarding dues post implementation of VI CPC is hosted on IRFC website. Additional page has also being provided for quick calculation of the personal case of each individual.
Website www.irfc-nausena.nic.in/navpay/index.htm or www.irfc-nausena.gov.in/navpay/index.htm
Regards
Cdr SS Ahuja (Retd)
Web Master NFDC
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Letter to Chiefs of Staff and RM
Dear Members,
As intimated to you, the Supreme Court has decided against the Government in the Maj Generals case but the MOD has yet to release the payment to them. This case also has a direct relationship with the Veterans case for Pension Parity/ OROP.
We have addressed separate letters to the three Chiefs and the RM on this issue. The letter to RM also complains against the failure of the GOI to settle the 4 pending 6PC issues. Copy of the letters are attached for your information please.
Warm regards
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd)
President
NFDC
******************************************************
THE NAVY FOUNDATION, DELHI CHARTER
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd) C 26, Sector 23
PVSM, AVSM Noida 201301
President, 11 Mar 2008
Navy Foundation, Delhi Chapter
53 Kotah House, Shah Jehan Road,
New Delhi 110011
1. You will be aware that the Maj Generals and equivalents had agitated their case before the Punjab High Court and then before the Supreme Court in their quest to get Pension parity with those brethren who retired after 1 Jan 1996 i.e. consequent to the 5th PC. The Supreme Court had given a very favorable judgment on 8 Sep 2008 and the GOI had gone in appeal and the same was again rejected by the same court a few days ago.
2. The SC had concluded that “The larger issue involved is whether there could be a disparity in payment of pension to officers of the same rank who had retired prior to the introduction of the revised pay scales, with those who retired there after”. It also noted that “16. The case of the respondents however, was that in view of the Constitution Bench decision of this court in the DS Nakara and others vs the UOI (1983) 1 SCC 305 the fixation of a cut off date as a result of which equals were treated as unequals, was wholly arbitrary and had been rightfully interfered with by the High Court. One of the questions posed in the aforesaid decision was whether a class of pensioners could be divided for the purpose of entitlement and payment of pension into those who retired by a certain date and those who retired there after. The question was answered by the Constitution Bench holding that such divisions being both arbitrary and unprincipled the classification did not stand the test of Article 14 of the Constitution.”
3. The Supreme Court has directed as follows :-
(a) 25. In our view, it would be arbitrary to allow such a situation to continue since the same also offends the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution.
(b) 29. The directions ultimately given by the Constitution Bench in the said case in order to resolve the dispute which had arisen, is of relevance to resolve the dispute in this case also.
(c) 31. We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal and modify the order of the High Court by directing that the pay of all pensioners in the rank of Major General and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank after the revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996, and, thereafter, to compute their pensionary benefits on such basis with prospective effect from the date of filing of the writ petition and to pay them the difference within three months from date with interest at 10% per annum. The respondents will not be entitled to payment on account of increased pension from prior to the date of filing of the writ petition.
4. Though, over six months have elapsed since the judgment was pronounced, the MOD/GOI have yet to issue the relevant orders and effect payment to the concerned officers and in fact are in contempt of the S Court. This is a sad reflection on the standing of the Servicemen in the mind and eyes of the political class that we are being denied our rightful dues and that have been legally approved. The issue of relevant orders in this case will also have a beneficial effect on the case for Pension Parity, for all Ranks, both Officers and PBORs that we have been agitating for, for some time with out the desired response from the MOD. It may also be added that those retiring after 1 Jan 2006 will also suffer as have those who retired before this date when the next Pay Commission findings take effect a few years down the line.
5. The Veteran’s community solicits your help and support, both officially and personally, in persuading the Raksha Mantri to issue the necessary orders without any further delay. It may be mentioned that these Orders, consequent to a judicial decision, will not be covered under the code of conduct imposed for the forthcoming elections.
To,
Admiral SC Mehta
Chairman COSC and CNS,
South Block,
New Delhi 110011
*************************************************************************
THE NAVY FOUNDATION, DELHI CHARTER
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd) C 26, Sector 23
PVSM, AVSM Noida 201301
President, 11 Mar 2008
Navy Foundation, Delhi Chapter
53 Kotah House, Shah Jehan Road,
New Delhi 110011
1. You may be aware that the Maj Generals and equivalents had agitated their case before the Punjab High Court and then before the Supreme Court in their quest to get Pension parity with those brethren who retired after 1 Jan 1996 i.e. consequent to the 5th PC. The Supreme Court had given a very favorable judgment on 8 Sep 2008 and the GOI had gone in appeal and the same was again rejected by the same court a few days ago.
2. The SC had concluded that “The larger issue involved is whether there could be a disparity in payment of pension to officers of the same rank who had retired prior to the introduction of the revised pay scales, with those who retired there after”. It also noted that “16. The case of the respondents however, was that in view of the Constitution Bench decision of this court in the DS Nakara and others vs the UOI (1983) 1 SCC 305 the fixation of a cut off date as a result of which equals were treated as unequals, was wholly arbitrary and had been rightfully interfered with by the High Court. One of the questions posed in the aforesaid decision was whether a class of pensioners could be divided for the purpose of entitlement and payment of pension into those who retired by a certain date and those who retired there after. The question was answered by the Constitution Bench holding that such divisions being both arbitrary and unprincipled the classification did not stand the test of Article 14 of the Constitution.”
3. The Supreme Court has directed as follows :-
(a) 25. In our view, it would be arbitrary to allow such a situation to continue since the same also offends the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution.
(b) 29. The directions ultimately given by the Constitution Bench in the said case in order to resolve the dispute which had arisen, is of relevance to resolve the dispute in this case also.
(c) 31. We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal and modify the order of the High Court by directing that the pay of all pensioners in the rank of Major General and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank after the revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996, and, thereafter, to compute their pensionary benefits on such basis with prospective effect from the date of filing of the writ petition and to pay them the difference within three months from date with interest at 10% per annum. The respondents will not be entitled to payment on account of increased pension from prior to the date of filing of the writ petition.
4. Though, over six months have elapsed since the judgment was pronounced, the MOD have yet to issue the relevant orders and effect payment to the concerned officers and in fact MOD are in contempt of the Supreme Court. This is a sad reflection on the standing and welfare of the ex-Servicemen with the MOD/GOI, that we are being denied our rightful dues and that too when they have been legally scrutinized and sanctioned. This has serious implications, for if the MOD/GOI, preaching and expecting us to follow the rule of law, do not go by the rule of law, who will, and that is a bad example to the men in uniform who are the one important set of people in this country who respect and follow the law.
5. Needless to say that there has been a constant undermining of the morale, of the serving and the retired community, as they feel ignored and slighted because they do not have the political clout and even those in uniform, who are tomorrows Veterans, are seething at the step motherly treatment by the MOD. The current agitation by Veterans with full support of their peers in uniform, neither brings credit to the Veterans nor to GOI, and does not bode well for the country’s future. Not one of the anomalies that the Hon’ble Raksha Mantri personally, and the Group of Ministers, had promised to settle by Diwali has yet seen the light of day and that speaks for itself.
6. The Veteran’s community solicits the Hon’ble Raksha Mantri’s personal help and support, to issue the necessary orders without any further delay. It may be mentioned that these Orders, consequent to a judicial decision, will not be covered under the Model code of conduct imposed for the forthcoming elections.
.
Mr. AK Antony
Honble Minister for Defence,
South Block, New Delhi 110011
As intimated to you, the Supreme Court has decided against the Government in the Maj Generals case but the MOD has yet to release the payment to them. This case also has a direct relationship with the Veterans case for Pension Parity/ OROP.
We have addressed separate letters to the three Chiefs and the RM on this issue. The letter to RM also complains against the failure of the GOI to settle the 4 pending 6PC issues. Copy of the letters are attached for your information please.
Warm regards
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd)
President
NFDC
******************************************************
THE NAVY FOUNDATION, DELHI CHARTER
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd) C 26, Sector 23
PVSM, AVSM Noida 201301
President, 11 Mar 2008
Navy Foundation, Delhi Chapter
53 Kotah House, Shah Jehan Road,
New Delhi 110011
1. You will be aware that the Maj Generals and equivalents had agitated their case before the Punjab High Court and then before the Supreme Court in their quest to get Pension parity with those brethren who retired after 1 Jan 1996 i.e. consequent to the 5th PC. The Supreme Court had given a very favorable judgment on 8 Sep 2008 and the GOI had gone in appeal and the same was again rejected by the same court a few days ago.
2. The SC had concluded that “The larger issue involved is whether there could be a disparity in payment of pension to officers of the same rank who had retired prior to the introduction of the revised pay scales, with those who retired there after”. It also noted that “16. The case of the respondents however, was that in view of the Constitution Bench decision of this court in the DS Nakara and others vs the UOI (1983) 1 SCC 305 the fixation of a cut off date as a result of which equals were treated as unequals, was wholly arbitrary and had been rightfully interfered with by the High Court. One of the questions posed in the aforesaid decision was whether a class of pensioners could be divided for the purpose of entitlement and payment of pension into those who retired by a certain date and those who retired there after. The question was answered by the Constitution Bench holding that such divisions being both arbitrary and unprincipled the classification did not stand the test of Article 14 of the Constitution.”
3. The Supreme Court has directed as follows :-
(a) 25. In our view, it would be arbitrary to allow such a situation to continue since the same also offends the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution.
(b) 29. The directions ultimately given by the Constitution Bench in the said case in order to resolve the dispute which had arisen, is of relevance to resolve the dispute in this case also.
(c) 31. We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal and modify the order of the High Court by directing that the pay of all pensioners in the rank of Major General and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank after the revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996, and, thereafter, to compute their pensionary benefits on such basis with prospective effect from the date of filing of the writ petition and to pay them the difference within three months from date with interest at 10% per annum. The respondents will not be entitled to payment on account of increased pension from prior to the date of filing of the writ petition.
4. Though, over six months have elapsed since the judgment was pronounced, the MOD/GOI have yet to issue the relevant orders and effect payment to the concerned officers and in fact are in contempt of the S Court. This is a sad reflection on the standing of the Servicemen in the mind and eyes of the political class that we are being denied our rightful dues and that have been legally approved. The issue of relevant orders in this case will also have a beneficial effect on the case for Pension Parity, for all Ranks, both Officers and PBORs that we have been agitating for, for some time with out the desired response from the MOD. It may also be added that those retiring after 1 Jan 2006 will also suffer as have those who retired before this date when the next Pay Commission findings take effect a few years down the line.
5. The Veteran’s community solicits your help and support, both officially and personally, in persuading the Raksha Mantri to issue the necessary orders without any further delay. It may be mentioned that these Orders, consequent to a judicial decision, will not be covered under the code of conduct imposed for the forthcoming elections.
To,
Admiral SC Mehta
Chairman COSC and CNS,
South Block,
New Delhi 110011
*************************************************************************
THE NAVY FOUNDATION, DELHI CHARTER
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd) C 26, Sector 23
PVSM, AVSM Noida 201301
President, 11 Mar 2008
Navy Foundation, Delhi Chapter
53 Kotah House, Shah Jehan Road,
New Delhi 110011
1. You may be aware that the Maj Generals and equivalents had agitated their case before the Punjab High Court and then before the Supreme Court in their quest to get Pension parity with those brethren who retired after 1 Jan 1996 i.e. consequent to the 5th PC. The Supreme Court had given a very favorable judgment on 8 Sep 2008 and the GOI had gone in appeal and the same was again rejected by the same court a few days ago.
2. The SC had concluded that “The larger issue involved is whether there could be a disparity in payment of pension to officers of the same rank who had retired prior to the introduction of the revised pay scales, with those who retired there after”. It also noted that “16. The case of the respondents however, was that in view of the Constitution Bench decision of this court in the DS Nakara and others vs the UOI (1983) 1 SCC 305 the fixation of a cut off date as a result of which equals were treated as unequals, was wholly arbitrary and had been rightfully interfered with by the High Court. One of the questions posed in the aforesaid decision was whether a class of pensioners could be divided for the purpose of entitlement and payment of pension into those who retired by a certain date and those who retired there after. The question was answered by the Constitution Bench holding that such divisions being both arbitrary and unprincipled the classification did not stand the test of Article 14 of the Constitution.”
3. The Supreme Court has directed as follows :-
(a) 25. In our view, it would be arbitrary to allow such a situation to continue since the same also offends the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution.
(b) 29. The directions ultimately given by the Constitution Bench in the said case in order to resolve the dispute which had arisen, is of relevance to resolve the dispute in this case also.
(c) 31. We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal and modify the order of the High Court by directing that the pay of all pensioners in the rank of Major General and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank after the revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996, and, thereafter, to compute their pensionary benefits on such basis with prospective effect from the date of filing of the writ petition and to pay them the difference within three months from date with interest at 10% per annum. The respondents will not be entitled to payment on account of increased pension from prior to the date of filing of the writ petition.
4. Though, over six months have elapsed since the judgment was pronounced, the MOD have yet to issue the relevant orders and effect payment to the concerned officers and in fact MOD are in contempt of the Supreme Court. This is a sad reflection on the standing and welfare of the ex-Servicemen with the MOD/GOI, that we are being denied our rightful dues and that too when they have been legally scrutinized and sanctioned. This has serious implications, for if the MOD/GOI, preaching and expecting us to follow the rule of law, do not go by the rule of law, who will, and that is a bad example to the men in uniform who are the one important set of people in this country who respect and follow the law.
5. Needless to say that there has been a constant undermining of the morale, of the serving and the retired community, as they feel ignored and slighted because they do not have the political clout and even those in uniform, who are tomorrows Veterans, are seething at the step motherly treatment by the MOD. The current agitation by Veterans with full support of their peers in uniform, neither brings credit to the Veterans nor to GOI, and does not bode well for the country’s future. Not one of the anomalies that the Hon’ble Raksha Mantri personally, and the Group of Ministers, had promised to settle by Diwali has yet seen the light of day and that speaks for itself.
6. The Veteran’s community solicits the Hon’ble Raksha Mantri’s personal help and support, to issue the necessary orders without any further delay. It may be mentioned that these Orders, consequent to a judicial decision, will not be covered under the Model code of conduct imposed for the forthcoming elections.
.
Mr. AK Antony
Honble Minister for Defence,
South Block, New Delhi 110011
Friday, March 6, 2009
AFNHB Housing Scheme Greater Noida Open for Registration
Dear Members,
Pls see the NHQ IG 056 of 04 Mar 2009 below for AFHNB Housing scheme Noida for Registration.
Regards
Cdr SS ahuja (Retd)
WebMaster NFDC
***********************************************************************************************
AFNHB HOUSING SCHEME GREATER NOIDA OPEN FOR REGISTRATION FROM 09 MARCH
1. 056 IG of 04 Mar 09. Registration for AFNHB Housing Scheme Greater Noida open from 09 Mar. Last date of receipt of applications 17 Apr 09.2. Salient Features as Follows
(a)
Location
About 03 KM from Pari Chowk. In close vicinity of existing Jal Vayu Vihar, opposite block-C of Pocket-P3, plot no. 9 Builders area, Greater Noida
(b)
Configuration
Sixteen Storeyed tower comprising 42 flats
(c)
Expected Commencement
March
(d)
Expected Completion
Two years from commencement
(e)
Tentative Cost Area Accommodation : as Enumerated below
Type/No. of Units
Super Area(Approx in SQ FT)
Tentative Cost (Rs. In Lakh)
Regn Amount (In Rupees)
Accommodation
Officers
42
2350
46.60
1,01,000/-
Drawing/Dining Room Four Bedrooms four toilets Dressing Room Kitchen, Balconies servant Room with toilet
(f) Parking Service Tax VAT and long term maintenance charges extra (g) Layout plans of colony and Flats displayed on website.
3. Eligibility
(a) Priority-I Widows of Air Force/Naval Officers died in Action/Harness.(b) Priority-II Serving and re-employed Officers air Force/Navy who have no prior Allotment in any AFNHB scheme. Short service Commissioned officers of Air Force and Navy who have no prior allotment in any AFNHB scheme.(c) Priority-III Widows of retired Air Force and Naval officer who are in receipt of family pension. Retired Air Force/Naval officers who are in receipt of pension or Disability Pension.(d) Priority-IV Serving Air Force/Naval officer and their widows who are allottes of an AFNHB Scheme. Retired Air Force/Naval officer and their widows in receipt of pension/family pension who are allottees of an AFNHB Scheme.
4. NCR demand survey already cancelled wef 20 oct 08 and not valid. Aspirants to apply afresh only on prescribed application form in master brochure and can be downloaded from our website alongwith registration amount of Rs 1,01,000/-. Rs 1000/- being nonrefundable administrative charges 5. Apply to DG AFNHB AF Station Race Course New Delhi 110 003 duly giving Service Number with full particulars and address alongwith Demand Draft in favour of AFNHB Delhi Payable at Delhi. Cheque will not be accepted. Incomplete/Incorrect applications will be rejected. Para Eleven. Rules Governed by Master Brochure Dec 2007 as amended from time to time and available on our website WWW.AFNHB.ORG6. For further details contact 23793462/63. E-mail address DIRECTORGENERAL@AFNHB.ORG7. Request wide Publicity. Authority: 056 IG Dated 04 Mar 2009.
Pls see the NHQ IG 056 of 04 Mar 2009 below for AFHNB Housing scheme Noida for Registration.
Regards
Cdr SS ahuja (Retd)
WebMaster NFDC
***********************************************************************************************
AFNHB HOUSING SCHEME GREATER NOIDA OPEN FOR REGISTRATION FROM 09 MARCH
1. 056 IG of 04 Mar 09. Registration for AFNHB Housing Scheme Greater Noida open from 09 Mar. Last date of receipt of applications 17 Apr 09.2. Salient Features as Follows
(a)
Location
About 03 KM from Pari Chowk. In close vicinity of existing Jal Vayu Vihar, opposite block-C of Pocket-P3, plot no. 9 Builders area, Greater Noida
(b)
Configuration
Sixteen Storeyed tower comprising 42 flats
(c)
Expected Commencement
March
(d)
Expected Completion
Two years from commencement
(e)
Tentative Cost Area Accommodation : as Enumerated below
Type/No. of Units
Super Area(Approx in SQ FT)
Tentative Cost (Rs. In Lakh)
Regn Amount (In Rupees)
Accommodation
Officers
42
2350
46.60
1,01,000/-
Drawing/Dining Room Four Bedrooms four toilets Dressing Room Kitchen, Balconies servant Room with toilet
(f) Parking Service Tax VAT and long term maintenance charges extra (g) Layout plans of colony and Flats displayed on website.
3. Eligibility
(a) Priority-I Widows of Air Force/Naval Officers died in Action/Harness.(b) Priority-II Serving and re-employed Officers air Force/Navy who have no prior Allotment in any AFNHB scheme. Short service Commissioned officers of Air Force and Navy who have no prior allotment in any AFNHB scheme.(c) Priority-III Widows of retired Air Force and Naval officer who are in receipt of family pension. Retired Air Force/Naval officers who are in receipt of pension or Disability Pension.(d) Priority-IV Serving Air Force/Naval officer and their widows who are allottes of an AFNHB Scheme. Retired Air Force/Naval officer and their widows in receipt of pension/family pension who are allottees of an AFNHB Scheme.
4. NCR demand survey already cancelled wef 20 oct 08 and not valid. Aspirants to apply afresh only on prescribed application form in master brochure and can be downloaded from our website alongwith registration amount of Rs 1,01,000/-. Rs 1000/- being nonrefundable administrative charges 5. Apply to DG AFNHB AF Station Race Course New Delhi 110 003 duly giving Service Number with full particulars and address alongwith Demand Draft in favour of AFNHB Delhi Payable at Delhi. Cheque will not be accepted. Incomplete/Incorrect applications will be rejected. Para Eleven. Rules Governed by Master Brochure Dec 2007 as amended from time to time and available on our website WWW.AFNHB.ORG6. For further details contact 23793462/63. E-mail address DIRECTORGENERAL@AFNHB.ORG7. Request wide Publicity. Authority: 056 IG Dated 04 Mar 2009.
Mumbai Attacks Study by RAND Corporation
Dear Members,
Am reproducing an article on the study of Mumbai Attacks undertaken by RAND corporation. I dont know when we will do such a study in India.
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd)
President , NFDC
************************************************************************
Terrorist Attacks Show Rise of Strategic Terrorist Culture
The Mumbai terrorist attacks in India suggest the possibility of an escalating terrorist campaign in South Asia and the rise of a strategic terrorist culture, according to a study issued today by the RAND Corporation. The RAND study identifies the operational and tactical features of the attack, evaluates the response of Indian security forces, and analyzes the implications for India, Pakistan and the United States. “India will continue to face a serious jihadist threat from Pakistan-based terrorist groups, and neither Indian nor U.S. policy is likely to reduce that threat in the near future,” said Angel Rabasa, lead author of the study and a senior political scientist with RAND, a nonprofit research organization. “Other extremist groups in Pakistan likely will find inspiration in the Mumbai attacks, and we can expect more attacks with high body counts and symbolic targets.” Mumbai is India's commercial and entertainment center, and the attacks on landmark properties amplified the psychological impact, according to the report. The selection of multiple targets — Americans, Britons and Jews, as well as Indians — suggests that the terrorists intended the attack to serve multiple objectives that extended beyond the terrorists' previous focus on Kashmir and India. “The defining characteristic of the Mumbai attack, and what makes it so alarming, is not just the ruthless killing, but the meticulous planning and preparation that went into the operation,” said Brian Michael Jenkins, a leading terrorism expert and senior advisor at RAND. “The goal was not only to slaughter as many people as possible, but to target specific groups of people and facilities with political, cultural and emotional value. This indicates a level of strategic thought — a strategic culture — that poses a difficult challenge: not whether we can outgun the terrorists, but can we outthink them?” Other authors of the study are former U.S. Ambassador to India Robert Blackwill, now a senior fellow at RAND; Peter Chalk, Kim Cragin, C. Christine Fair, Seth Jones, Nathaniel Shestak, all of RAND, and Ashley Tellis, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The Mumbai attacks are significant in their audacity and ambition, as well as the complexity of the operation and the diversity of targets, according to researchers. Evidence suggests that planning for the attacks began as far back as mid-2007. The terrorists were heavily armed, and had detailed maps and information about each of the targets they hit. The multiple targets were carefully chosen for their religious, political and cultural values in order to make a statement. One of the main lessons of Mumbai is that it exposed numerous weaknesses in India's counter-terrorism and threat mitigation structure, according to the report. Indian intelligence officials had received prior warnings from their own staff, as well as U.S. sources, that a major attack was probable, but did not take any specific action. The report analyzes key weaknesses in the country's general counter-terrorism and threat-mitigation structure, including gaps in coastal surveillance, inadequate “target hardening,” incomplete execution of response protocols, response timing problems, inadequate counter-terrorism training and equipment for the local police, limitations of municipal fire and emergency services, flawed hostage-rescue plans, and poor strategic communications and information management. The Mumbai terrorist attack has significant and potentially far-reaching implications for India, Pakistan, and the international community, according to researchers. The terrorists have been linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba, a banned Islamist terrorist group based in Pakistan with connections to Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency. India is likely to hold the state of Pakistan responsible for the attacks and may look for a way to punish Pakistan to deter future attacks. Both countries have nuclear weapons, making any military action a dangerous course, but if India does not respond, that would signal a lack of Indian resolve or capability, according to the report. Without an appropriate response, Pakistan, or at least those elements of its military and intelligence leadership that are supportive of the activities of groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba, are likely to conclude that these operations, in some measure, yield benefits that exceed the cost. For these and a myriad other reasons, researchers say, India is likely to remain a target of Pakistan-based and indigenous Islamist terrorism for the foreseeable future. But the focus on Pakistan should not obscure the fact that the terrorists likely had help from inside India. Local radicalization is a major goal of the terrorists, and will be a major political and social challenge for India. The repercussions for Pakistan will depend largely on what India and the international community do. Thus far, Indian and American officials recognize that Pakistan's civilian government does not control the policies that its military and intelligence agency hold toward militant groups operating in and from Pakistan. According to the RAND researchers, the best outcome would be for Pakistan's civilian government to slowly and incrementally exert civilian control over its military and intelligence agencies. But this will be difficult as many in those agencies view the Taliban and other extremists as their natural allies, and the United States and India as threats to Pakistan's security. The Mumbai attack underscores the imperative of addressing the transnational sources of Islamist terrorism in India. How to do this is an extraordinarily difficult question that will require the reassessment of basic assumptions in policy toward Pakistan by members of the international community. The study, “The Lessons of Mumbai” can be found at www.rand.org This research was supported by RAND, using discretionary funds made possible by the generosity of donors, the fees earned on client-funded research, and independent research and development funds (IR&D) funds provided by the U.S. Department of Defense. The study was prepared by the RAND National Security Research Division, which conducts research and analysis for all national security sponsors other than the U.S. Air Force and the Army. NSRD also conducts research for the U.S. Intelligence community and the ministries of defense of U.S. allies and partners.
About the RAND Corporation The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world.
Am reproducing an article on the study of Mumbai Attacks undertaken by RAND corporation. I dont know when we will do such a study in India.
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd)
President , NFDC
************************************************************************
Terrorist Attacks Show Rise of Strategic Terrorist Culture
The Mumbai terrorist attacks in India suggest the possibility of an escalating terrorist campaign in South Asia and the rise of a strategic terrorist culture, according to a study issued today by the RAND Corporation. The RAND study identifies the operational and tactical features of the attack, evaluates the response of Indian security forces, and analyzes the implications for India, Pakistan and the United States. “India will continue to face a serious jihadist threat from Pakistan-based terrorist groups, and neither Indian nor U.S. policy is likely to reduce that threat in the near future,” said Angel Rabasa, lead author of the study and a senior political scientist with RAND, a nonprofit research organization. “Other extremist groups in Pakistan likely will find inspiration in the Mumbai attacks, and we can expect more attacks with high body counts and symbolic targets.” Mumbai is India's commercial and entertainment center, and the attacks on landmark properties amplified the psychological impact, according to the report. The selection of multiple targets — Americans, Britons and Jews, as well as Indians — suggests that the terrorists intended the attack to serve multiple objectives that extended beyond the terrorists' previous focus on Kashmir and India. “The defining characteristic of the Mumbai attack, and what makes it so alarming, is not just the ruthless killing, but the meticulous planning and preparation that went into the operation,” said Brian Michael Jenkins, a leading terrorism expert and senior advisor at RAND. “The goal was not only to slaughter as many people as possible, but to target specific groups of people and facilities with political, cultural and emotional value. This indicates a level of strategic thought — a strategic culture — that poses a difficult challenge: not whether we can outgun the terrorists, but can we outthink them?” Other authors of the study are former U.S. Ambassador to India Robert Blackwill, now a senior fellow at RAND; Peter Chalk, Kim Cragin, C. Christine Fair, Seth Jones, Nathaniel Shestak, all of RAND, and Ashley Tellis, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The Mumbai attacks are significant in their audacity and ambition, as well as the complexity of the operation and the diversity of targets, according to researchers. Evidence suggests that planning for the attacks began as far back as mid-2007. The terrorists were heavily armed, and had detailed maps and information about each of the targets they hit. The multiple targets were carefully chosen for their religious, political and cultural values in order to make a statement. One of the main lessons of Mumbai is that it exposed numerous weaknesses in India's counter-terrorism and threat mitigation structure, according to the report. Indian intelligence officials had received prior warnings from their own staff, as well as U.S. sources, that a major attack was probable, but did not take any specific action. The report analyzes key weaknesses in the country's general counter-terrorism and threat-mitigation structure, including gaps in coastal surveillance, inadequate “target hardening,” incomplete execution of response protocols, response timing problems, inadequate counter-terrorism training and equipment for the local police, limitations of municipal fire and emergency services, flawed hostage-rescue plans, and poor strategic communications and information management. The Mumbai terrorist attack has significant and potentially far-reaching implications for India, Pakistan, and the international community, according to researchers. The terrorists have been linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba, a banned Islamist terrorist group based in Pakistan with connections to Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency. India is likely to hold the state of Pakistan responsible for the attacks and may look for a way to punish Pakistan to deter future attacks. Both countries have nuclear weapons, making any military action a dangerous course, but if India does not respond, that would signal a lack of Indian resolve or capability, according to the report. Without an appropriate response, Pakistan, or at least those elements of its military and intelligence leadership that are supportive of the activities of groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba, are likely to conclude that these operations, in some measure, yield benefits that exceed the cost. For these and a myriad other reasons, researchers say, India is likely to remain a target of Pakistan-based and indigenous Islamist terrorism for the foreseeable future. But the focus on Pakistan should not obscure the fact that the terrorists likely had help from inside India. Local radicalization is a major goal of the terrorists, and will be a major political and social challenge for India. The repercussions for Pakistan will depend largely on what India and the international community do. Thus far, Indian and American officials recognize that Pakistan's civilian government does not control the policies that its military and intelligence agency hold toward militant groups operating in and from Pakistan. According to the RAND researchers, the best outcome would be for Pakistan's civilian government to slowly and incrementally exert civilian control over its military and intelligence agencies. But this will be difficult as many in those agencies view the Taliban and other extremists as their natural allies, and the United States and India as threats to Pakistan's security. The Mumbai attack underscores the imperative of addressing the transnational sources of Islamist terrorism in India. How to do this is an extraordinarily difficult question that will require the reassessment of basic assumptions in policy toward Pakistan by members of the international community. The study, “The Lessons of Mumbai” can be found at www.rand.org This research was supported by RAND, using discretionary funds made possible by the generosity of donors, the fees earned on client-funded research, and independent research and development funds (IR&D) funds provided by the U.S. Department of Defense. The study was prepared by the RAND National Security Research Division, which conducts research and analysis for all national security sponsors other than the U.S. Air Force and the Army. NSRD also conducts research for the U.S. Intelligence community and the ministries of defense of U.S. allies and partners.
About the RAND Corporation The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Sad Demise of Cdr Balwant Rai at DDun on 28 Feb 2009
Dear Members, Deeply regret to announce the passing away of Cdr Balwant Rai, on 28 Feb 09 at 1845 hrs at Dehradun. He had been battling diabetes and renal failure in ever-increasing intensity for the past 2 years, and had been in hospital the past 3 months.
Cdr Balwant Rai was an Air Electrical Officer involved with Sea Kings and Sea Harriers, and had done an extended tenure on board INS Vikrant. He is survived by his wife, Shashi, and two daughters, Dr Ranju Chawla and Rinku Bhatia. Mrs. Rai's residential telephone number is 0135-2734911, and Cdr Atul Bhatia (Son-in-law) mobile number is 9818397938 and email Atul_rinku@hotmail.com Chautha is on 04 March at Dehra Dun. Navy Foundation Delhi Charter deeply mourns the passing away of Cdr Balwant Rai. Regards Cdr SS Ahuja (Retd)web Master NFDC
Cdr Balwant Rai was an Air Electrical Officer involved with Sea Kings and Sea Harriers, and had done an extended tenure on board INS Vikrant. He is survived by his wife, Shashi, and two daughters, Dr Ranju Chawla and Rinku Bhatia. Mrs. Rai's residential telephone number is 0135-2734911, and Cdr Atul Bhatia (Son-in-law) mobile number is 9818397938 and email Atul_rinku@hotmail.com Chautha is on 04 March at Dehra Dun. Navy Foundation Delhi Charter deeply mourns the passing away of Cdr Balwant Rai. Regards Cdr SS Ahuja (Retd)web Master NFDC
Sunday, March 1, 2009
An Article by Gen Shankar Roy Choudhary..Deccan Chronicle
Dear Members,
An article by Gen Shankar RoyChowdhury published in the Deccan Chronicle is forwarded for your info please.
Regards
Cdr SS Ahuja (Retd)
Web Master NFDC
******************************************************
/www.deccanchronicle.com/node/18008/pri=t
For ex-servicemen, parity in rank, pension long overdue
By By Shankar Roychowdhury
Feb 25 2009
Three hundred or so weather-beaten old military veterans returned their medals to the President of India on February 8 as a mark of protest against official apathy in the matter of “one rank one pension” (OROP) a feeble flapping of wings by an irrelevant group which barely made any ripples in the public domain. Nevertheless, it should serve as a small, perhaps miniscule, reminder of the continuing dissatisfaction and unhappiness of a forgotten community. It is, of course, no secret that the defence services have been bitterly resentful of the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission with respect to pay scales and, perhaps, more significantly in terms of downgraded equivalence with their civilian counterparts.
Whatever dissatisfactions on these and other aspects may have been expressed within the services, they did not find their way into the public domain, and the service chiefs too maintained a stiff upper lip, though they were undoubtedly concerned about its effects on their respective forces and with good reason. They jointly chose to highlight their unhappiness with stunning and totally unprecedented gesture of not accepting the new pay scales until anomalies had been looked into and ironed out and chose to continue with the existing pay scales in the interim period, a unique “Gandhigiri” in uniform, something unheard of earlier, which must have caused a flutter in the bureaucratic and ministerial dovecotes of South Block. Some in the print media, and at least, one irascible former diplomat were perhaps nudged to fume and splutter that it was really uppity for the services to “demand” pay scales, parity of service and protocol with the civil servants and all that — bad for discipline, don’t you know! Better keep these soldierwallahs at heel!
The moral courage of the service chiefs was exemplary during their undoubted crisis of conscience, and fully in consonance with the second stanza of the Credo of the Indian Military Academy — “The honour welfare and comfort of the men you command come next”, which ranks below the safety, honour and welfare of the country, but well above “your own ease comfort and safety” which comes “Last — Always and Everytime”. Ex-servicemen were most supportive, anxious and fully concerned, but wisely refrained from raising issues pertaining to their serving comrades who were best left to the official hierarchy. They focused on issues pertaining to ex-servicemen for which they adopted the prevalent customs of the strange world outside the service — meetings at Jantar Mantar, processions, slogans, fasts and even intended self-immolation. All this was alien to their traditional environment and something that many within the community were themselves uncomfortable with. Throughout the whole proceedings, the armed forces — the “Fauj” — maintained total impassivity, but their silence was deafening in its own context. They watched, listened and noted because the present generation of soldiers no longer conform to the traditional public stereotype of dumb-driven cattle. They are intelligent, highly-trained and highly-skilled craftsmen in a deadly trade. They are not mercenaries or contract soldiers fighting for pay. The government came out with two amazing statements: The government did not have the resources to grant OROP and if granted to ex-servicemen, the public sector, the paramilitary forces and the civil establishment would also want the same. To take the second point first — ex-servicemen of the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force are not, repeat not, from paramilitary forces, the public sector or the civil establishment. In their own time, they constituted the “Ultima ratio regis” — the King’s last argument, India’s last resort when all else has failed, and they have the track record to prove it. Comparisons are, therefore, ill-informed and odious and should not be made. As for availability of funds, India is no longer a “poor” country and while financial resources at the disposal of the government may not be unlimited, there is certainly no crippling shortage either. Extensive investments have been made in the social sector and it is, indeed, right that this should be so, yet it is also undeniable that there is massive haemorrhage of public funds from flagship projects like the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. With proper supervision and oversight, funds for OROP can certainly be found if the haemorrhage is staunched, and proper accountability enforced.
The OROP movement by ex-servicemen is perhaps not a desirable development, but there has to be some other credible alternate method of drawing attention of the government to an intrinsically social issue. However, it is the possible long-term implications of such agitations which should be of concern to present and future governments — its effects on the serving soldiers, sailors and airmen, including their officers, who constitute the rigidly-disciplined world of defence forces. The relationship between the serving and former soldiers is umbilical and their perceptions and values fundamentally identical. The OROP agitation by ex-servicemen presents a complex paradox of service values and ethos impacted by the realities of the world outside the services. At this stage all that can be said is that matters are seriously wrong and require to be looked into.
In the midst of all this comes Mumbai 26/11, with its 24x7 breaking news coverage of commandos from the Special Action Group (SAG) of the National Security Guard (NSG — all Army, by the way) dropping onto Nariman House and excited chatter about surgical strikes against Pakistan on chat shows. Also around this time, almost unnoticed, the “Bharat sarkar” makes an announcement granting, amongst other benefits, a separate Pay Commission for the defence services, one of the very long-standing demands of the armed forces hitherto dismissed out of hand by the bureaucracy. Coincidence? Am I reading things into it or might there be (as is whispered) a connection between Mumbai 26/11 and the sudden change in attitude of the government on Sixth Pay Commission awards to the defence services?Meanwhile, reports out of Pakistan indicate that the Taliban are on the move and are headed our way. So be glad India, that you have one of the finest armed forces in the world — on land, sea and air. Look after them, even pamper them a little, but above all, be thankful, because if you have to call upon them again, they will be there.
Gen. Shankar Roychowdhury (Retd) is a former Chief of Army Staff and a former Member of Parliament
-------------THE END
An article by Gen Shankar RoyChowdhury published in the Deccan Chronicle is forwarded for your info please.
Regards
Cdr SS Ahuja (Retd)
Web Master NFDC
******************************************************
/www.deccanchronicle.com/node/18008/pri=t
For ex-servicemen, parity in rank, pension long overdue
By By Shankar Roychowdhury
Feb 25 2009
Three hundred or so weather-beaten old military veterans returned their medals to the President of India on February 8 as a mark of protest against official apathy in the matter of “one rank one pension” (OROP) a feeble flapping of wings by an irrelevant group which barely made any ripples in the public domain. Nevertheless, it should serve as a small, perhaps miniscule, reminder of the continuing dissatisfaction and unhappiness of a forgotten community. It is, of course, no secret that the defence services have been bitterly resentful of the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission with respect to pay scales and, perhaps, more significantly in terms of downgraded equivalence with their civilian counterparts.
Whatever dissatisfactions on these and other aspects may have been expressed within the services, they did not find their way into the public domain, and the service chiefs too maintained a stiff upper lip, though they were undoubtedly concerned about its effects on their respective forces and with good reason. They jointly chose to highlight their unhappiness with stunning and totally unprecedented gesture of not accepting the new pay scales until anomalies had been looked into and ironed out and chose to continue with the existing pay scales in the interim period, a unique “Gandhigiri” in uniform, something unheard of earlier, which must have caused a flutter in the bureaucratic and ministerial dovecotes of South Block. Some in the print media, and at least, one irascible former diplomat were perhaps nudged to fume and splutter that it was really uppity for the services to “demand” pay scales, parity of service and protocol with the civil servants and all that — bad for discipline, don’t you know! Better keep these soldierwallahs at heel!
The moral courage of the service chiefs was exemplary during their undoubted crisis of conscience, and fully in consonance with the second stanza of the Credo of the Indian Military Academy — “The honour welfare and comfort of the men you command come next”, which ranks below the safety, honour and welfare of the country, but well above “your own ease comfort and safety” which comes “Last — Always and Everytime”. Ex-servicemen were most supportive, anxious and fully concerned, but wisely refrained from raising issues pertaining to their serving comrades who were best left to the official hierarchy. They focused on issues pertaining to ex-servicemen for which they adopted the prevalent customs of the strange world outside the service — meetings at Jantar Mantar, processions, slogans, fasts and even intended self-immolation. All this was alien to their traditional environment and something that many within the community were themselves uncomfortable with. Throughout the whole proceedings, the armed forces — the “Fauj” — maintained total impassivity, but their silence was deafening in its own context. They watched, listened and noted because the present generation of soldiers no longer conform to the traditional public stereotype of dumb-driven cattle. They are intelligent, highly-trained and highly-skilled craftsmen in a deadly trade. They are not mercenaries or contract soldiers fighting for pay. The government came out with two amazing statements: The government did not have the resources to grant OROP and if granted to ex-servicemen, the public sector, the paramilitary forces and the civil establishment would also want the same. To take the second point first — ex-servicemen of the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force are not, repeat not, from paramilitary forces, the public sector or the civil establishment. In their own time, they constituted the “Ultima ratio regis” — the King’s last argument, India’s last resort when all else has failed, and they have the track record to prove it. Comparisons are, therefore, ill-informed and odious and should not be made. As for availability of funds, India is no longer a “poor” country and while financial resources at the disposal of the government may not be unlimited, there is certainly no crippling shortage either. Extensive investments have been made in the social sector and it is, indeed, right that this should be so, yet it is also undeniable that there is massive haemorrhage of public funds from flagship projects like the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. With proper supervision and oversight, funds for OROP can certainly be found if the haemorrhage is staunched, and proper accountability enforced.
The OROP movement by ex-servicemen is perhaps not a desirable development, but there has to be some other credible alternate method of drawing attention of the government to an intrinsically social issue. However, it is the possible long-term implications of such agitations which should be of concern to present and future governments — its effects on the serving soldiers, sailors and airmen, including their officers, who constitute the rigidly-disciplined world of defence forces. The relationship between the serving and former soldiers is umbilical and their perceptions and values fundamentally identical. The OROP agitation by ex-servicemen presents a complex paradox of service values and ethos impacted by the realities of the world outside the services. At this stage all that can be said is that matters are seriously wrong and require to be looked into.
In the midst of all this comes Mumbai 26/11, with its 24x7 breaking news coverage of commandos from the Special Action Group (SAG) of the National Security Guard (NSG — all Army, by the way) dropping onto Nariman House and excited chatter about surgical strikes against Pakistan on chat shows. Also around this time, almost unnoticed, the “Bharat sarkar” makes an announcement granting, amongst other benefits, a separate Pay Commission for the defence services, one of the very long-standing demands of the armed forces hitherto dismissed out of hand by the bureaucracy. Coincidence? Am I reading things into it or might there be (as is whispered) a connection between Mumbai 26/11 and the sudden change in attitude of the government on Sixth Pay Commission awards to the defence services?Meanwhile, reports out of Pakistan indicate that the Taliban are on the move and are headed our way. So be glad India, that you have one of the finest armed forces in the world — on land, sea and air. Look after them, even pamper them a little, but above all, be thankful, because if you have to call upon them again, they will be there.
Gen. Shankar Roychowdhury (Retd) is a former Chief of Army Staff and a former Member of Parliament
-------------THE END
Govt Review Petition
Dear Members,
We are indeed happy to inform you that the Supreme Court, as expected and indicated at the AGM, has rejected the Review Petition submitted by the Govt.in the case of Maj Generals. We now await Governments response as no further judicial review is possible and hope they would now implement the Supreme Court orders for the Maj Generals and all others.
As briefed earlier, this case for all purposes is one for OROP for Maj Generals. A brief on legal basis on our proposed case will be forwarded for the information of our members, shortly.
Regards
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd)
President
NFDC
We are indeed happy to inform you that the Supreme Court, as expected and indicated at the AGM, has rejected the Review Petition submitted by the Govt.in the case of Maj Generals. We now await Governments response as no further judicial review is possible and hope they would now implement the Supreme Court orders for the Maj Generals and all others.
As briefed earlier, this case for all purposes is one for OROP for Maj Generals. A brief on legal basis on our proposed case will be forwarded for the information of our members, shortly.
Regards
Vice Admiral Harinder Singh (Retd)
President
NFDC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)