Bathinda Army Base Shooting: It would be mistake to ignore its wider implications

Seriousness of incident underlines that there are wider implications for army and national security

Early Wednesday – April 12 – morning came the shocking news; four Indian army soldiers were shot dead in the military station Bathinda, Punjab. By the end of the day,  it was given out that the soldiers were asleep in their barracks when they were fired upon and killed and the First Information Report (FIR) registered with Bhatinda police stated that two men wearing “kurta pajamas” or loose shirt and trousers, usually worn by men in the area, committed this act. This proved that the earlier claim of the police that it was an incident of fratricide,  and not an act of terrorism, had its own flaws.

However, the seriousness of the incident underlines that there are wider implications for the army and national security, which should not be ignored by treating it as an isolated local incident. Even if the incident was confined to a particular military station, and it would be probed as such, but its potential impact on a wider scale cannot be swept under carpet.

The incident, the way it has played out and been reported, makes it clear that it was not taken with the seriousness that it deserved. There could have been a host of reasons for the police and the army to underplay the nature of the incident, because giving a description to the killings could entail questions, and in the current times, there is a tendency to run away from questions. And, some of the questions as to how the incident took place, and what were the motives of the assailants (unless proved terrorist) may get answered once the investigations conclude. There, however, are larger questions that will remain there. A sincere effort should be made to find answers, that will be good for the institution of the army, and the state of Punjab.

MS Education Academy

It would be a mistake to dismiss this incident in Bathinda military station, the largest in the country, barely 100 km from the Pakistan border, in isolation. The army is a countrywide institution, which is stationed on borders, and also stays within cantonments. The presence of the army in cantonments is a  source of confidence for the people that there are reserves, ready for any eventuality on borders, or in the eventuality of natural disasters. The army, also is the most respected institution in India, for the spirit of sacrifice, dedication and devotion to duty displayed by jawans whenever the nation is confronted with challenges and crises. So, an incident taking place in one cantonment or military station is relayed across the entire force. Thanks to advanced communication technologies, and with everyone equipped with mobile phones, the news travels from one end to the other in a matter of seconds. This speed and speculations about such incidents create a lot many doubts, which can be avoided only if the facts are given out at the very outset. This is imperative to keep the doubts off, though discretion should be used in offering premature conclusions like it was given out in Bathinda that it was an act of fratricide. It may well turn out to be true, but without proper investigation and without verification of facts, too, can be a misleading and doubt-creating exercise. These are the perils of early conclusions.

The army needs and must find out the truth as early as possible. The doubts about the nature of the incident. The only fact that is fact about the incident is that four soldiers were shot dead while they were asleep in their barracks. There are other reports that an INSAS rifle was stolen along with 28 rounds two days prior to the incident. This should invoke deeper investigation as to who did it and does it lead to some wider conspiracy. These are issues to be addressed.

And, it is clear that this particular incident is not an internal matter or simply a spree of the murder of four soldiers. It is a clear case of a security breach. The theft of the rifle and 28 rounds is a  story of security reach and lack of oversight. It also reflects that the theft was not taken as seriously as it should have been, as it is clear that INSAS was used. Whether or not it is the same stolen  INSAS, the very incident points out the breaches within.

The army should investigate the matter, which it will certainly do, to get to the bottom of the incident. More importantly, it should speed up the investigations and its findings in the overall interest of the institution. We have seen, through our experience of such incidents, in Kashmir, that these incidents have wider impacts and ramifications.  In the early 200s, there were several of such incidents in cantonments – camps – both of fratricide and acts of terror – in Kashmir. These left the place and the institution scarred.   Let there be no repeat of that.

Back to top button