Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T05:39:31.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Every death matters?”: Combat casualties, role conception, and civilian control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2021

Anit Mukherjee Open the ORCID record for Anit Mukherjee [Opens in a new window]
Anit Mukherjee*
Affiliation:
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

How do combat missions, defined as an armed confrontation that causes casualties, shape civil-military relations and military’s role conception? This article argues that militaries that incur combat casualties gain a stronger hand in the civil-military equilibrium. This is because casualties affect domestic political opinion and give prominence to the views expressed by military officials. Civilians are then more deferential to professional military advice. In turn, the military obtains considerable operational freedom, and can pick and choose missions which they find desirable. Second, the military’s role conception – an important determinant of military missions, is shaped most prominently by its combat experience. Militaries sustaining casualties obtain leverage vis-à-vis civilians and based on their institutional preference, they either prioritise or avoid non-traditional missions. While making these arguments, this article examines combat casualties, role conception, and civilian control in India. These concepts as a whole and, the Indian case study especially are surprisingly understudied considering it is among the few non-Western democracies with firm civilian control, a record of overseas intervention operations and a military with varying roles and missions. Analysing India’s experience therefore adds to the literature and illuminates the mechanism through which casualties affect civil-military relations.

Keywords

Civil-Military RelationsCivilian ControlCasualty SensitivityRole ConceptionIndia
Type
Special Issue Article
Information
European Journal of International Security , Volume 7 , Special Issue 1: Military Organizations in a Changing World: How New Operational Experiences Shape Civil-Military Relations , February 2022 , pp. 124 - 141
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the British International Studies Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Jenne, Nicole, ‘Civilianizing the armed forces? Peacekeeping, a traditional mission for the military’, Defence Studies, 20:2 (2020), pp. 105–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Owens, Mackubin, ‘Understanding civil-military relations during the Clinton-Bush era’, in Reveron, Derek S. and Stiehm, Judith Hicks, Inside Defense: Understanding the U.S. Military in the 21st Century (London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), pp. 194–5Google Scholar and David E. Johnson, ‘Modern U.S. Civil-Military Relations: Wielding the Terrible Swift Sword’, McNair Paper No. 57 (Washington, DC: National Defense University, 1997), pp. 93–4. See also Risa Brooks and Peter Michael Erickson, ‘The sources of military dissent: Why and how the US military contests civilian decisions about the use of force’, European Journal of International Security, this Special Issue.

3 As of 31 July 2021, India has suffered 174 casualties, see {https://peacekeeping.un.org/sites/default/files/stats_by_nationality_mission_2_65_july2021.pdf}.

4 Smith, Hugh, ‘What costs will democracies bear? A review of popular theories of casualty aversion’, Armed Forces & Society, 31:4 (2005), pp. 487–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lacquement, Richard, ‘The casualty-aversion myth’, Naval War College Review, 57:1 (2004), pp. 39–57Google Scholar, and for a good overview, see Gelpi, Christopher, Feaver, Peter, and Reifler, Jason, ‘Success matters: Casualty sensitivity and the war in Iraq’, International Security, 30:3 (2005), pp. 10–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Levy, Yagil, ‘How casualty sensitivity affects civilian control: The Israeli experience’, International Studies Perspectives, 12 (2011), p. 68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Levy, ‘How casualty sensitivity affects civilian control’.

7 There is a large body of literature surrounding military casualties and its effects on public opinion and support for military operations; see Larson, Eric, Casualties and Consensus: The Historical Role of Casualties in Domestic Support for U.S. Military Operations (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1996)Google Scholar; Gartner, Scott and Segura, Gary M., ‘War, casualties and public opinion’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42:3 (1998), pp. 278–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Hamanaka, Shingo, ‘Sensitivity to casualties in the battlefield: The case of Israel’, Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 3:1 (2018), pp. 46–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Golby, James, Feaver, Peter, and Dropp, Kyle, ‘Elite military cues and public opinion about the use of military force’, Armed Forces & Society, 44:1 (2018), pp. 44–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Payne, Andrew, ‘Presidents, politics, and military strategy: Electoral constraints during the Iraq War’, International Security, 44:3 (2019), p. 186Google Scholar.

10 Cochran, Shawn T., War Termination as a Civil-Military Bargain: Soldiers, Statesmen, and the Politics of Protracted Armed Conflict (London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), pp. 29–70Google Scholar.

11 Burbach, David, ‘Confidence without sacrifice: American public opinion and the U.S. military’, in Beehner, Lionel, Brooks, Risa, and Maurer, Daniel (eds), Reconsidering American Civil-Military Relations: The Military, Society, Politics, and Modern War (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2021), p. 152Google Scholar.

12 Boucher, Jean-Christophe, ‘Public opinion and Canadian defence policy’, in Juneau, Thomas, Lagassé, Philippe, and Vucetic, Srdjan (eds), Canadian Defence Policy in Theory and Practice (London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020), p. 171Google Scholar; see also Veilleux-Lepage, Yannick, ‘Implications of the sunk cost effect and regional proximity for public support for Canada's mission in Kandahar’, International Journal, 68:2 (2013), pp. 346–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Klarevas, Louis, Gelpi, Christopher, and Reifler, Jason, ‘Casualties, polls, and the Iraq War’, International Security, 31:2 (autumn 2006), pp. 186–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Feaver, Peter and Gelpi, Christopher, Choosing Your Battles: American Civil-Military Relations and the Use of Force (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

15 Boettcher, William and Cobb, Michael, ‘Echoes of Vietnam? Casualty framing and public perceptions of success and failure in Iraq’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50:6 (2006), p. 849CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Bove, Vincenzo, Rivera, Mauricio, and Ruffa, Chiara, ‘Beyond coups: Terrorism and military involvement in politics’, European Journal of International Relations, 26:1 (2020), pp. 263–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Gerber, Theodore P. and Mendelson, Sarah E., ‘Casualty sensitivity in a post-Soviet context: Russian views of the Second Chechen War, 2001–2004’, Political Science Quarterly, 123:1 (2008), p. 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Data from Defense Casualty Analysis System, available at: {https://dcas.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/pages/casualties.xhtml}; total casualties incurred in Operations Iraqi Freedom, New Dawn, and Inherent Resolve (all in the Iraqi theater) from 2003 to 2020 is 3,540 fatalities.

19 Michael C. Desch, ‘Bush and the generals’, Foreign Affairs, 86:3 (May/June 2007).

20 Owens, ‘Understanding civil-military relations during the Clinton-Bush era’, pp. 197–201. For an account of how the war was mismanaged, challenging both civilians and the military during this period, see Ricks, Tom E., The Gamble: General Petraeus and the American Military Adventure in Iraq (New York, NY: Penguin Press, 2009), pp. 31–124Google Scholar.

21 Recchia, Stefano, Reassuring the Reluctant Warriors: U.S. Civil-Military Relations and Multilateral Intervention (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2015), p. 229CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Feaver, Peter, ‘The right to be right: Civil-military relations and the Iraq surge decision’, International Security, 35:4 (2011), p. 88CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Kaplan, Fred, The Insurgents: David Petraeus and the Plot to Change the American Way of War (New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 2013)Google Scholar.

23 Payne, ‘Presidents, politics, and military strategy’, pp. 191–200.

24 Data from Defense Casualty Analysis System, available at: {https://dcas.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/pages/casualties.xhtml}; total casualties incurred in Operations Enduring Freedom and Freedom's Sentinel (both in the Afghan theater) from 2001 to 2020 is 1,909 fatalities.

25 Brooks, Risa, ‘Paradoxes of professionalism: Rethinking civil-military relations in the United States’, International Security, 44:4 (2020), pp. 38–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Lara Seligman et al., “How Biden's team overrode the brass on Afghanistan’, Politico (14 April 2021), available at: {https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/14/pentagon-biden-team-overrode-afghanistan-481556}.

27 As per one database, during these years, there were 32, 27, 27, and 29 fatalities due to hostilities; see {http://www.icasualties.org/App/AfghanFatalities}.

28 Lagassé, Philippe and Sokolsky, Joel J., larger, ‘A “footprint” in Ottawa: General Hillier and Canada's shifting civil-military relationship, 2005–2008’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 15:2 (2009), p. 16Google Scholar.

29 After the invasion of Iraq in 2003, during which Britain suffered 39 fatalities, the costliest years of the war were 2006 and 2007, wherein it lost 27 and 36 soldiers, respectively (all figures exclude non-hostile casualties). These numbers have been arrived at: {http://icasualties.org/}; for problematic civil-military relations during this time, see James de Waal, Depending on the Right People: British Political-Military Relations, 2001–10 (Chatham House, November 2013), pp. 14–33 and Andrew M. Dorman, ‘The United Kingdom: Increasingly fractious civil–military relations’, Oxford Research Encyclopedia (31 August 2021), available at: {https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1862}.

30 Vennesson, Pascal et al. , ‘Is there a European way of war? Role conceptions, organizational frames, and the utility of force’, Armed Forces & Society, 35:4 (2009), p. 630CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Paul Shemella, ‘The spectrum of roles and missions of the armed forces’, in Thomas Bruneau and Scott D. Tollefson (eds), Who Guards the Guardians and How Democratic Civil-Military Relations (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 2008), pp. 125–8.

32 See also Christoph Harig and Chiara Ruffa, ‘Knocking on the barracks’ door: How role conceptions shape the military’s reactions to political demands’, European Journal of International Security, this Special Issue.

33 Jenne, ‘Civilianizing the armed forces?’ p. 106.

34 Dandeker, Christopher and Gow, James, ‘Military culture and strategic peacekeeping’, Small Wars & Insurgencies, 10:2 (1999), pp. 58–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Claus Kold, ‘New operations – new attitudes? Are soldiers’ attitudes influenced by the objectives of peace operations?’, Journal of International Peacekeeping, 17:1–2 (2013), pp. 46–73.

35 For instance, in Mongolia, politicians were able to force the military to assume its peacekeeping function; see Bruneau, Thomas C. and Mendee, Jargalsaikhan, ‘Discovering peacekeeping as a new mission: Mongolia’, in Bruneau, Thomas C. and Matei, Florina Cristiana (eds), The Routledge Handbook of Civil–Military Relations (New York, NY: Routledge, 2013), p. 209Google Scholar.

36 Berndtsson, Joakim, Dandeker, Christopher, and Ydén, Karl, ‘Swedish and British public opinion of the armed forces after a decade of war’, Armed Forces & Society, 41:2 (2015), pp. 307–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 For recent scholarship that captures the divisions between civilians and the military, see Evans, Alexandra T. and Potter, A. Bradley, ‘When do leaders change course? Theories of success and the American withdrawal from Beirut, 1983–1984’, Texas National Security Review, 2:2 (2019), pp. 10–38Google Scholar.

38 Mackubin Owens, ‘Understanding civil-military relations during the Clinton-Bush era’, p. 194.

39 See also Brooks and Erickson, ‘The sources of military dissent’, European Journal of International Security, this Special Issue.

40 Dessie Zagorcheva, ‘Statesmen, Soldiers, and Strategy: The Influence of Civil-Military Relations on U.S. National Security Decision-Making’ (PhD dissertation, Columbia University, 2013), p. 257; see also Kohn, Richard, ‘The erosion of civilian control of the military in the United States today’, Naval War College Review, 55:3 (2002), pp. 12–19Google Scholar and Richard Serrano and Art Pine, ‘Policy on Somalia, Haiti angers Pentagon’, Los Angeles Times (19 October 1993), p. 10.

41 Leonhard, Nina, ‘Towards a new German military identity? Change and continuity of military representations of self and other(s) in Germany’, Critical Military Studies, 5:4 (2019), pp. 304–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar, see also Tomas Kucera, ‘Can “citizen in uniform” survive? German civil–military culture responding to war’, German Politics, 21:1 (2012), pp. 53–72.

42 Wilkinson, Steven I., Army and Nation: The Military and Indian Democracy since Independence (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tudor, Maya, The Promise of Power: The Origins of Democracy in India and Autocracy in Pakistan (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 Ankit, Rakesh, The Kashmir Conflict: From Empire to the Cold War, 1945–66 (New York, NY: Routledge, 2016), pp. 41–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 Prasad, S. N. and Thapliyal, U. P., The India-Pakistan War of 1965: A History (Ministry of Defence, New Delhi: Natraj Publishers, 2011), p. 3Google Scholar.

45 Raghavan, Srinath, War and Peace in Modern India (London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), pp. 26–98Google Scholar.

46 Raghavan, Srinath, ‘Civil-military relations in India: The China Crisis and after’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 32:1 (2009), pp. 172–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

47 Mukherjee, Anit, The Absent Dialogue: Politicians, Bureaucrats, and the Military in India (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2019), p. 60Google Scholar.

48 Arzan Tarapore, ‘Strategies of Stalemate: Explaining Indian Military Effectiveness, 1965–90’ (PhD dissertation: Kings College, London, 2017), p. 59. I thank the author for sharing this with me.

49 Mukherjee, Absent Dialogue, pp. 15–37.

50 For more on the downsides of separate domains, see Brooks, ‘Paradoxes of professionalism’, pp. 7–44.

51 Bass, Gary J., The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide (New York, NY: Vintage, 2013)Google Scholar.

52 Mukherjee, Absent Dialogue, pp. 73–80.

53 Raghavan, Srinath, ‘Soldiers, statesmen, and India's security policy’, India Review, 11:2 (2012), p. 122CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

54 Tarapore, ‘Strategies of Stalemate’, p. 120.

55 Ibid., pp. 113, 142–4.

56 Prasad, S. N., Official History of the 1971 War (New Delhi, India: Ministry of Defence, 1992), pp. 788–92Google Scholar.

57 Mukherjee, Absent Dialogue, pp. 73–80.

58 Deshmukh, B. G., From Poona to the Prime Minister's Office: A Cabinet Secretary Looks Back (New Delhi, India: Harper Collins Publishers, 2004), pp. 163–6Google Scholar.

59 Zins, Max-Jean, ‘Public rites and patriotic funerals: The heroes and the martyrs of the 1999 Indo-Pakistan Kargil War’, India Review, 6:1 (2007), p. 38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

60 Funerals of dead soldiers are a relatively recent development in India gaining prominence after the 1999 Kargil War. Since then, the Indian military has drawn up elaborate Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) to repatriate bodies of dead soldiers, a practice it did not usually follow in its earlier wars. Currently, the proliferation of mass media draws significant public and political attention amidst patriotic symbolism to these funerals. For more on this, see Max-Jean Zins, ‘Public rites and patriotic funerals’. Significantly, indicative of public resolve, no major political party has articulated a demand to desist from domestic counterinsurgency operations.

61 Chaudhuri, Rudra, Forged in Crisis: India and the United States since 1947 (New Delhi, India: Oxford University Press, 2014), pp. 199–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

62 Rahul Singh, ‘Of 1,000 soldiers lost in Siachen, only 220 fell to enemy bullets’, The Hindustan Times (14 February 2016), available at: {https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/of-1-000-soldiers-lost-in-siachen-only-220-fell-to-enemy-bullets/story-FLvSUFDAnnmUt5oiagQ8hK.html}.

63 Saran, Shyam, How India sees the World: Kautilya to the 21st Century (New Delhi, India: Juggernaut Publishers, 2017), pp. 89–92Google Scholar; Nalin Mehta, ‘Why India has to fight the world's most absurd war’, The Times of India (15 February 2016), available at: {https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/academic-interest/why-india-has-to-fight-the-worlds-most-absurd-war/}.

64 For an analysis of the 2005 attempt, see Mukherjee, Absent Dialogue, pp. 252–4. For more on the efforts in 2012, see Shiv Aroor and Gaurav C. Sawant, ‘Siachen demilitarisation: Could PM gift away to Pakistan what Army has won?’, India Today (14 May 2012), available at: {https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/cover-story/story/20120514-siachen-glacier-demilitarisation-indian-army-pakistan-758307-2012-05-05}.

65 Chadha, Vivek, Kargil: Past Perfect, Future Uncertain? (New Delhi, India: Knowledge World Publishers, 2019), p. 70Google Scholar.

66 Chandra Shekhar, ‘Kargil: An Overview’, available at: {http://generalchandrashekhar.blogspot.in/2012/07/kargil-war-overview.html} and Menon, Narayan, ‘Kargil controversy: IAF on the ghosts of Kargil’, Indian Defence Review, 25:3 (2010), p. 123Google Scholar.

67 V. P. Malik, Kargil: From Surprise to Victory (New Delhi, India: HarperCollins, 2007), pp. 144–8; Press Trust of India, ‘Ex-Army chief: Told Vajpayee to avoid disclosing policy of not crossing LoC’, The Week (14 July 2019), available at: {https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2019/07/14/ex-army-chief-told-vajpayee-to-avoid-disclosing-policy-of-not-crossing-loc.html}.

68 Ajay Sura, ‘Political leadership was more concerned about polls than ongoing Kargil War: General V. P. Malik’, The Times of India (23 November 2019), available at: {http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/72192175.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst}.

69 Dutt, Barkha, This Unquiet Land: Stories from India's Fault Lines (New Dehli, India: Aleph Book Company, 2015), pp. 58–70Google Scholar.

70 Zahid Hussain, Sujatha Shenoy, and Raj Chengappa, ‘Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif forced to withdraw troops from Kargil, risks his political future’, India Today (19 July 1999), available at: {https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/cover-story/story/19990719-pakistan-pm-nawaz-sharif-forced-to-withdraw-troops-from-kargil-risks-his-political-future-824806-1999-07-19}.

71 Bommakanti, Kartik, ‘Coercion and control: Explaining India's victory at Kargil’, India Review, 10:3 (2011), pp. 308–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

72 For more on the intellectual debates preceding the Kargil War, see Mukherjee, Anit, Failing to Deliver: Post Crises Defence Reforms in India, 1998–2010 (New Delhi, India: Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, 2011), pp. 9–16Google Scholar.

73 Sumit Ganguly and David P. Fidler (eds), India and Counterinsurgency: Lessons Learned (New York, NY: Routledge, 2013).

74 Anshu Chatterjee, ‘Shifting lines of governance in insurgencies’, in Bruneau and Matei (eds), The Routledge Handbook of Civil-Military Relations, pp. 167–80.

75 For a good background, see Vivek Chadha (ed.), Armed Forces Special Powers Act: The Debate (New Delhi, India: Lancer Books, 2013), available at: {https://idsa.in/monograph/ArmedForcesSpecialPowersActTheDebate}

76 Mukherjee, Absent Dialogue, pp. 254–57 and Sanjib Baruah, ‘Routine emergencies: India's Armed Forces Special Powers Act’, in Aparna Sundar and Nandini Sundar, Civil Wars in South Asia: State, Sovereignty, Development (New Delhi, India: SAGE Publications, 2014), pp. 192–207. See also ‘Very difficult to move forward on amending AFSPA: PC’, The Hindustan Times (7 February 2013), available at: {https://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/very-difficult-to-move-forward-on-amending-afspa-pc/story-Okg0ELAvCo5rWz3hkYvqxH.html}.

77 ‘Army Chief opposes withdrawal of AFSPA’, New Indian Express (1 January 2012), available at: {https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2012/jan/01/army-chief-opposes-withdrawal-of-afspa-325849.html}.

78 ‘Withdrawal of AFSPA could help extremists: BJP’, Outlook India (28 October 2011), available at: {https://www.outlookindia.com/newswire/story/withdrawal-of-afspa-could-help-extremists-bjp/739740}.

79 ‘Omar Abdullah to NDTV on the controversy over AFSPA’, NDTV (3 November 2011), available at: {https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/full-transcript-omar-abdullah-to-ndtv-on-the-controversy-over-afspa-565965}.

80 ‘Army opposes Omar's plans to revoke AFSPA: Report’, The Times of India (26 February 2009), available at: {https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Army-opposes-Omars-plans-to-revoke-AFSPA-Report/articleshow/4197012.cms}; Renu Mittal, ‘Antony, Chidambaram clash over AFSPA withdrawal in J&K’, Rediff News (11 September 2010), available at: {http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/sep/11/antony-chidambaram-differ-over-afspa-withdrawal-in-jk.htm}.

81 Bhavna Vij-Aurora, ‘Central team nixes Omar Abdullah move, stays removal of AFSPA’, India Today (5 November 2011), available at: {https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/nation/story/20111114-afspa-jammu-and-kashmir-omar-abdullah-749544-2011-11-05}.

82 Anit Mukherjee, ‘India's experience with insurgency and counterinsurgency’, in Sumit Ganguly, Andrew Scobell, and Joseph Liow (eds), The Routledge Handbook of Asian Security Studies (London, UK: Routledge, 2009), pp. 140–59.

83 Rajagopalan, Rajesh, Fighting like a Guerrilla: The Indian Army and Counterinsurgency (London, UK: Routledge, 2008), pp. 156–64Google Scholar.

84 Data taken from the National War Memorial website, available at: {https://nationalwarmemorial.gov.in/}. These figures have been arrived at by calculating fatalities coded as ‘CI & IS Ops’ (Counterinsurgency and Internal Security operations). Such an approach has also been taken for the war years – 1962, 1965, and 1971. Notably, and inexplicably, this online memorial excludes casualties in counterinsurgency operations in Sri Lanka (1987–90) and in the 1999 Kargil War.

85 Rajagopalan, Rajesh, ‘Innovations in counterinsurgency: the Indian Army's Rashtriya Rifles’, Contemporary South Asia, 13:1 (2004), pp. 25–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

86 Vivek Chadha, ‘The Indian Army adapting to change: The case of counter-insurgency’, in Jo Inge Bekkevold, Ian Bowers, and Michael Raska (eds), Security, Strategy and Military Change in the 21st Century: Cross-Regional Perspectives (Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2015), pp. 126–7.

87 Ajai Shukla, ‘Generals, quotas damage the army’, Business Standard (27 April 2015), available at: {https://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/ajai-shukla-revive-the-army-s-warrior-cult-115042700981_1.html}; see also Ajai Shukla, ‘Don't divide the army, Mr Parrikar’, Business Standard (31 March 2015).

88 Harwant Singh, ‘Army chief appointment: No compelling reason to break the chain of seniority’, The Hindustan Times (20 December 2016), available at: {https://www.hindustantimes.com/opinion/new-army-chief-no-compelling-reason-to-break-the-chain-of-seniority/story-emnt7CkNs4sO8PY0pVMjFM.html}; see also Sushant Singh, ‘Superseding two senior Lt Gens, Bipin Rawat is new Army Chief; Dhanoa to head Air Force’, The Indian Express (18 December 2016), available at: {https://indianexpress.com/article/india/bipin-rawat-indian-army-chief-birender-singh-dhanoa-air-force-4432972/}.

89 Ayesha Ray, ‘Indian civil-military relations: An overview’, in Harsh Pant (ed.), Handbook of Indian Defence Policy (New Delhi, India: Routledge, 2016), p. 52.

90 Rahi Gaikwad, ‘Manmohan: Naxalism the greatest internal threat’, The Hindu (11 October 2009), available at: {https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/Manmohan-naxalism-the-greatest-internal-threat/article16886121.ece}.

91 P. R. Chari, ‘Countering the Naxalites: Deploying the Armed Forces’, IPCS Special Report No. 89 (April 2010), pp. 6–7, available at: {https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/115573/SR89-PR_Chari.pdf}; see also Sandeep Unnithan and Bhavna Vij-Aurora, ‘Declare war’, India Today (8 April 2010), available at: {https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/cover-story/story/20100419-declare-war-742561-2010-04-08}.

92 Manas Dasgupta, ‘IAF chief not for using air power against Naxals’, The Hindu (8 April 2010), available at: {https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/IAF-chief-not-for-using-air-power-=against-Naxals/article16364778.ece} and Press Trust of India, ‘I opposed Army deployment in anti-naxal operations: Gen VK Singh’, Economic Times (8 November 2013), available at: {https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/i-opposed-army-deployment-in-anti-naxal-operations-gen-vk-singh/articleshow/25451086.cms} In India the executive has powers to deploy the military for internal security duties and does not require parliamentary approval. However, due to the federal structure, it either needs to dismiss or coopt the state government.

93 For details, see Ministry of Defence, Annual Report: 2017–18 (New Delhi: Government of India, 2018), p. 154.

94 Nambiar, Satish, For the Honour of India: A History of Indian Peacekeeping (New Delhi, India: Lancer Publications, 2009)Google Scholar.

95 Levy, ‘How casualty sensitivity affects civilian control’, p. 69.

96 Golbi, Feaver, and Dropp, ‘Elite military cues and public opinion about the use of military force’, p. 45.

97 For an overview of this debate, see Miller, Charles, ‘Re-examining the Australian public's attitude to military casualties: Post-heroic or defeat-phobic?’, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 68:5 (2014), pp. 517–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar. To be sure, as admitted by the author, the notions of what matters more – success or victory is overly simplistic and reductionist.

98 Polina Beliakova, ‘Erosion of civilian control in democracies: A comprehensive framework for comparative analysis’, Comparative Political Studies (2021), p. 2, available at: {https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414021989757}.

99 Peter White, ‘Generals in the Cabinet: Military participation in government and international conflict initiation’, International Studies Quarterly (February 2021), p. 10, available at: {https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqab012}.