The army chief has said that soldiers should not make complaints about their conditions to the social media, but should make them to him directly.
This raises some important questions :...
1. Under British rule of course an Indian soldier could not vent his complaint publicly. But after India became independent, has the position not changed ?
2. In a democracy, does the army belong to the army chief, or even to the President of India ( the supreme commander ), or does it belong to the people ?
3. In a democracy, are the people supreme, or are the state authorities ( the President, Prime Minister, etc ) and army chief supreme ?
4. If the army belongs to the people, and if the people are supreme, as I believe they are, then are the people not entitled to know the conditions and welfare of soldiers ? After all, soldiers, and even the army chief, get salaries out of the taxes people pay.
5. How else will people know about the conditions of soldiers except through the media ? The media acts as an agent of the people.
6. The army chief must have served in the army for 30-35 years. Can it be believed that he did know till now what was going on in the Indian army, and the conditions of soldiers . If he did, why did he not take, or recommend ,correctional steps till now?