Modi Government’s Agniveer Scheme Needs Rethinking
The centre’s decision to overhaul the Agnipath scheme—extending Agniveers' tenure from four to six years and offering another chance at permanent absorption—implicitly admits the original scheme was not adequately thought through. Introduced four years ago, it drew criticism from defence experts who questioned its rationale and warned it was conceived without sufficient consultation with…
The Modi government's Agniveer scheme, which was designed to extend the tenure of recruits from four to six years, has come under scrutiny for its perceived shortcomings. Critics argue that the original scheme lacked proper consultation with stakeholders, particularly the armed forces and their personnel. This decision to overhaul the Agnipath scheme implicitly concedes that the initial plan was not thought through adequately.
While the government claims that the changes were made in response to positive feedback on fitness, motivation, and technological adaptability, they stress that these qualities alone do not make a professional soldier. Military effectiveness is also contingent upon factors such as experience, institutional memory, unit cohesion, and the bonds of trust developed over years of service.
Frequent turnover can undermine these crucial qualities that contribute to the professional character of the Indian armed forces. The government's attempt to create a second pathway for the remaining 75% of recruits offers higher remunerations and extended employment, but those absorbed later will have lower seniority compared to the first 25%.
This creates uncertainty within the scheme itself. Furthermore, there are concerns about the scheme's limited appeal among minorities, who already face underrepresentation in the armed forces. The armed forces are a national institution that requires the confidence and support of all communities. Any recruitment policy should prioritize operational requirements, professional excellence, and the welfare of those who serve, rather than treating military personnel as mere manpower resources.
National security is a matter of utmost importance and should not be treated as an experiment in manpower management.
Written by urgent.news from Free Press Journal's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
