Articles

India’s 31st defence minister doesn’t give the impression of machismo on the prowl. Yet decorated generals and snooty IAS officers who sit in front of him to hear and give briefings feel his presence powerfully. His decisive personality is not derived from his IIT-Bombay training. He speaks the language of the common soldier. He doesn’t beat around the bush. Unlike other erudite colleagues and predecessors, Parrikar has chosen to be politically incorrect. Aggression is his best defence. In the past two years, he has dismantled numerous roadblocks, ensured full accountability and given fetterless freedom in decision-making to all defence organisations.

Much to the chagrin of civil servants, Parrikar has enhanced the involvement of uniformed personnel in strategic decision-making. Above all, he has made it clear that diplomacy in defence matters is the last resort of scoundrels. It should be left to South Block seneschals to deal with the fallout of any military action. It was thus a rare moment for the ministry when a Lt General and a senior external affairs ministry official were directed to brief the media on the surgical strikes in PoK.

For the past few weeks, devious dilettantes of détente who talk peace but practice treachery have targeted Parrikar. As Pakistan escalated and aided terror attacks against India, he chose not to mince words but vowed to make mincemeat of those with evil designs on the country. He had the full backing of PM Narendra Modi. After decades, Parrikar is the first defence minister to have instructed the Army to publicly admit, nay flaunt, the successful cross-border strikes. Though the Congress claimed that during the UPA regime, too, the Army carried out similar strikes on its orders, not even once were these punitive actions publicised, fearing international isolation. Team Modi-Parrikar used the military action as a moral weapon to quarantine Pakistan. No country in the world bothered to respond to Pakistan’s appeal for at least a mild statement condemning India. Yet there were many domestic demagogues who hounded the government to offer evidence of the strikes in name of neutralising Pak propaganda. Parrikar invited the wrath of peaceniks with the loaded statement, “We will use terrorism (yes, terrorists) to encounter terrorism by Pakistan or Pakistani militants.” He was dubbed a hawk. His political adversaries questioned Parrikar’s ability to be the defence minister. The former Goa CM was for all purposes just articulating the established practice of using surrendered terrorists to identify and eliminate active terrorists.