‘Agniveers Can’t Be Like Parasitic IAS Officers’: Abhijit Iyer-Mitra Says ‘Perform Or Go Home’

Summary

Defence analyst Abhijit Iyer-Mitra describes Agnipath as a pilot project, not a failed reform, and says it worked better than he expected. He supports extending service by two years and giving recruits who perform well a chance at permanent military service. To him, the changes reflect learning and adaptation, and the scheme offers an alternative route into military and related work.

Service terms and benefits

Iyer-Mitra rejects Rahul Gandhi’s description of Agniveers as “use-and-throw” labour. He argues that short-term and full-time soldiers have different terms of service, so different retirement benefits are not inherently discriminatory.

He accepts that military pensions are a legitimate fiscal concern and supports proportional retirement benefits for short service. However, he argues that death or injury in the line of duty should bring full benefits and says Agniveers should have access to military healthcare after service.

Training and the scheme’s purpose

Iyer-Mitra pushes back on claims that recruits are simply being sent to the border with inadequate preparation. He argues that practical experience at the border is part of training, while acknowledging that training and performance should be assessed.

He notes that other countries use forms of military or national service, though he characterizes India’s scheme as an optional alternative pathway, not conscription.

Political timing and policy changes

Iyer-Mitra agrees that the changes were made with elections—including Uttarakhand’s—in mind, but doubts they will determine the broader electoral outcome. He argues that policy adjustments are normal and should not automatically be treated as proof that the original scheme failed.

Broader views on military careers

Iyer-Mitra says India should invest more in people, career development and training, rather than treating technology as a substitute for personnel. He believes the army could be smaller and more effective with better planning.

He also argues against guaranteed permanent jobs for recruits who do not meet the required standard, using the phrase “perform or perish,” and sharply criticizes what he sees as a culture of secure government employment.

Presenters and contributors

• Meghna Deka: Presenter and interviewer
• Abhijit Iyer-Mitra: Defence analyst and guest