A Soldier’s Measure

In India’s noisy political theatre, the armed forces are often invoked but rarely understood. In February this year, an ill-judged claim on the 2020 Galwan Valley clash by Congressman and Opposition Leader Rahul Gandhi in Parliament put former Army chief General Manoj Mukund Naravane in the spotlight.

Gandhi, who had cited excerpts from Naravane’s unpublished memoir ‘Four Stars of Destiny’ during the Lok Sabha Motion of Thanks debate, had selectively interpreted a line from Naravane’s memoir - “jo uchit samjho, woh karo” (“do what you think is right”) - allegedly told by the BJP political leadership to Naravane during the 2020 Galwan Valley crisis. By this, the Congress leader had insinuated that the BJP brass, including Prime Minister Modi, had failed to provide clear direction to the Indian army at a moment of acute military brinkmanship with China. The stark implication was that Modi government had reportedly ‘shirked’ responsibility when it mattered most.

It has now been flatly contradicted by Naravane himself. Speaking to television channels, the former Army chief made quite clear that far from being abandoned as claimed by Gandhi, he was given a “free hand” – that is full operational authority, including the right to open fire on Chinese troops if required – by the ruling government. The phrase that Gandhi seized upon, “jo uchit samjho, woh karo,” was not an evasion but an affirmation of trust in the then Army chief by his political masters. It reflected, Naravane noted, the government’s confidence in a commander best placed to judge a fluid, high-risk situation.

Naravane’s rebuttal to Gandhi’s sensational claims was typical of the man – restrained but firm. “If you don’t want to believe your Prime Minister, if you don’t want to believe your Defence Minister, if you don’t want to believe your Foreign Minister, if you don’t want to believe your Army Chief, there is no amount of convincing that will make you change your opinion,” said the former Army chief while speaking to a news channel.

Naravane’s tenure as Chief of Army Staff from 2019 to 2022 coincided with one of the most fraught periods in India’s recent military history. The crisis along the Line of Actual Control in eastern Ladakh was a systemic challenge to established understandings between India and China. The Galwan Valley clash of June 2020, which left 20 Indian soldiers dead, had shattered decades of uneasy stability. It was in this crucible that Naravane’s leadership was tested.

Under Naravane, the Indian Army mounted one of its most demanding high-altitude deployments, sustaining tens of thousands of troops through successive winters while reinforcing its positions along the Line of Actual Control. More importantly, it seized the initiative when it mattered. The occupation of dominating heights on the southern bank of Pangong Tso shifted the tactical balance decisively in India’s favour, creating leverage that later shaped disengagement talks.

Yet to understand Naravane solely through this crisis is to miss the texture of the man. Commissioned into the Sikh Light Infantry in 1980, he is the son of an Indian Air Force officer, a background that exposed him early to the rhythms of military life. Educated at the National Defence Academy and the Indian Military Academy, he built his career through field commands in Jammu and Kashmir and the Northeast, staff roles and instructional tenures.

As Director General of Military Operations, he dealt with the daily grind of managing India’s contested borders; as Eastern Army Commander, he oversaw a theatre that includes the sensitive frontier with China.

There is also an intellectual side to Naravane, an avid reader with a particular fondness for history and literature. While he has penned a thriller, ‘The Cantonment Conspiracy,’ his latest book titled ‘The Curious and the Classified: Unearthing Military Myths and Mysteries’ is a collection of essays that attempts to demystify the military for civilian readers. It is, in a sense, an effort to bridge the very gap that Gandhi’s reckless intervention has widened.

There is a broader lesson in the controversy Gandhi ignited, and it is not flattering to India’s political class. Scrutiny of the armed forces is legitimate in a democracy; flippancy is not.

Naravane’s career offers a steadier counterpoint to this controversy. His tenure was defined not by dramatic gestures but by disciplined management of risk and ensuring that India held its ground without stumbling into a wider conflict.

he temptation in politics is to speak quickly and move on. The burden in uniform is to decide carefully and live with the consequences. Few episodes illustrate that divide as starkly as this one - and few figures embody it as quietly as General Naravane.