Insecurities Within Callous Thuds and Jackboots
With the rollout of the scheme, the gendered implications of further militarization of society and the anxiety that comes with temporary job security are constantly marginalized. For or Against? Decide for yourself.
Modi has made surprise his most revered tool for reinforcing his hold on power; he did this in September 2020 with the farm law amendments, and he does it again with ‘Agnipath’; which is a four-year short-term contractual recruitment into the armed forces. The government claims that it is a “transformative military reform.” Supporters say skyrocketing pension liabilities prevented the acquisition of modern weaponry, therefore limiting pensions was requisite; also, 75% of discharged Agniveers will return to civilian life imbued with discipline and a questionable nationalist-clad warm heart (plus 11.7 lakhs as consolation). The country will gain from this.
If this is so, then why have protests spewed galore? Why are those meant to benefit from this scheme taking to the street?
The announcement sparked protests in 16 states, some turned violent, stones were pelted, and buses and other public properties were destroyed; all-in-all, it was not received well.
To begin with, it is crucial to understand the need for this scheme in the first place. In the budget estimate for FY22 (Fiscal Year 2022), the salaries and pensions account for over 54% of the total defence budget. On the other hand, capital outlay accounts for 27% of the budget. This is the amount that is spent on the procurement of new weapons and technologies for the forces. Over the last decade, the share of pensions has been seen rising while the capital outlay has declined. Thus, the advantages of the scheme from a Realist's view are quite clear: It will not only cut the average age of the forces from 32 to 26 but will also lead to a lower burden on the exchequer as 75% of the troops will be demobilized after their four-year stint.
​
Hence, it can be seen as a transformation into a lean and efficient combat force offering initial employment and creating a vast pool of skilled soldiers. The money saved through this scheme will be utilized in modernizing the Indian army through the induction of innovative technologies such as artificial intelligence, duvet space, drones, etc.
​
But at the same time, the most important feature of the scheme remains that only 25 percent of Agniveers would be retained at the end of the four-year tenure, while the remaining 75 per cent are meant to get alternate jobs after the time in service. Nevertheless, 75 percent will be decommissioned with ‘attitude’ and valued traits of leadership and discipline. Associated with the military state of mind and life, what qualifications will 21–25-year old's have in the struggling competition for jobs and security in a hostile market? Will they use a part of the Rs. 11.7 lakh exit package to invest in higher education? A small business? Sustenance?
The negative sentiments generated towards it are primarily because the new recruitment scheme does not offer security for a government job, nor does it provide retirement benefits like pensions. Hence the temporariness of the scheme makes for unsustainable employment, which births desperation. In the current recruitment system, being selected to join the Army ends the recruit’s search for a secure livelihood and anxiety about their future. Agnipath will not only destroy this secure future but shall be the beginning of a new, even more, severe insecurity.
While the economic benefits of the scheme are clear and easy to quantify, demystifying how it may affect the armed forces themselves is a challenge. What is obvious is that if the scheme aims to meet its goal of reducing the average age of the armed forces to 26, it will require a large inflow of Angiveers, potentially uprooting the current regimental system of the Indian army. Furthermore, ‘modernizing’ the armed forces to be akin to that of other nations could backfire, especially considering that the armed forces of nations such as the United Kingdom (whose structure was directly quoted to be an inspiration for the scheme) or the United States (which is facing issues regarding veterans' affairs, and pensions).
None of the aforementioned challenges have been mollified - anxieties left marginalized. Ignored were the gorging civilian anxieties about the social costs of ever larger sections of youth getting imbued with the ideology of militarism, intensified nationalism, and the normalization of the use of coercive power for dispute settlement. Ignored, too, are the gendered implications of the further militarization of society and the consequences, public and private, of the familiar and the strange with the use and proliferation of small arms. More so, marginalized are the anxieties of those working and earning, regardless of what we do; a job is a job and security mustn't be a scheme doused in temporariness.
​
Written by Janhavi Pasricha