Irresponsible Journalism
For well over two centuries, the topic of Civil-Military relations has been found to be an evolving process. This process is also contingent upon the ideologies followed by the political leadership of a country. The German and Japanese experience in the early 19th century prompted experts to classify them as "militaristic" nations. Military men assuming political roles, attempts to exercise civilian control over the military and the Nazi experience of unheeded military warnings which led to catastrophic results, have all been well documented.
The profession of the military is "management/containment of violence." Consequently, the primary function of the military is successful armed combat. This being a highly complex and technology intensive activity, the entire process of selection, training and career progression is very unique to the Military. Hence, the military profession is considered to be as valuable if not more than other top professions. This is one of the reasons why the military commands the respect of the society.
Since management of violence can and must only be practised for socially approved purposes, the State would necessarily have to enjoy the total monopoly over the military profession. Thus, the relation between the State and the Military assumes a sacred dimension.
Such a powerful tool in the hands of any Government can only be used if regulations, customs and traditions are strictly followed. There is no scope for irreverence or interpretation of military orders. The soldier on entry surrenders some of his constitutional rights such as free speech, travel abroad, unauthorised association with the media and many more. He signs a virtual agreement to lay down his life when required. No other profession is required to do so.
It is in this context that the recent efforts made by the media to coerce a serving soldier( a generic term used for navy and air force personnel too) to appear before a camera becomes an irresponsible act. In the case in point, a highly traumatised soldier was asked to comment on the political and social dimensions of a personal tragedy. This is not synonymous with an act of bravery or yeoman service rendered during natural calamities when a mike is thrust at the face of a soldier
Any responsible journalist knows that there are clear orders that prohibit serving soldiers from expressing their political opinions because the military is required to be loyal to the elected Government of the day irrespective of its ideology. Worldwide, discussions on politics are discouraged in militaries of democratically elected Governments. They are required to remain apolitical until they shed their uniforms. This does not prevent a soldier from exercising his franchise in favour of individuals of his choice.
In the event, the soldier in question displayed maturity and grace well beyond his age. His statements reflected the discipline and patriotic fervour of military minds which are focused on combat duties and service to the nation. If his message was directed both to the journalists and politicians, they did not seem to apply to either, much like the water on the ducks back.
For a moment imagine the damage that could have resulted had the highly traumatised soldier given vent to his distress. He would have accentuated communal tensions not only in his village but much further beyond. The Indian Military known to be apolitical and secular would also, perhaps, have been pushed to take damage control measures to retain equanimity in the face of provocative and irresponsible behaviour of lumpen elements of our civil society.
To the TRP driven 24/7 news channels which conduct shouting matches without fail, it has to be said that having 'experienced anchors 'and some research staff who produce immaculate records of who said what and when, do not make the news channel news worthy or instructive, in a nation filled with impatient and partially informed audience. Anchors are not so well informed and knowledgeable as some believe.
If mere possession of information is knowledge and wisdom is not even a peripheral desired objective, kindly spare the Military which has a clear-cut role to perform against many odds. Also, note that men in uniform who appear on media without approval are subject to rules and regulations specific to this theme. Failure to act upon such indiscretion may be taken as a precedence for future violation.
An indisciplined Military is as good as not having one.
Published by The Quint on 07 Oct.
No comments:
Post a Comment