There are many debates going on over compensation paid to those who martyr on line of duty. Furthering the argument, a military official says that this Agnipath scheme will degrade the effectiveness of combat.
In Defence, it usually takes seven years for a soldier to become fully combat-ready. Common point of debate here is that Agniveer soldiers retire after four years under this scheme, so are they equipped or experienced enough to defend the nation?
The nature of warfare is changing rapidly with ever-growing technology in recent times. On asking what are some of the impact Agnipath scheme has on the Army, Navy and Air Force, a military official says, "why should the armed forces spend precious time and money, training Agniveers to handle weapons when we know that after four years they’ll be gone from the military and skill we trained them for will be of no further use to the nation — for which we give our lives to."
K.B. Singh, a retired navy official, wrote in a post on X, formerly Twitter, that “The only motivation driving Agnipath is reducing the pension bill. The fact that this scheme will degrade combat effectiveness is known to all who understand national security."
Interestingly, PMO has also directed that entire intake of 'agniveers' should be done on short-service basis.
There are now two classes of soldiers, the Agniveers and the regular ones — which is now creating an unhealthy competition to prove the sustainability to be retained as regular soldiers.
