By Ghulam Haider Shaikh
The recent eruption of violent infighting within the Indian military in Kashmir has exposed a serious fracture in what was considered one of the region’s most organized and disciplined forces. Reports emerging from both Pakistani and Arab media — now corroborated by prominent Pakistani outlets — point toward a deadly encounter between two Indian forces: the Border Security Force (BSF) and the Sikh Light Infantry. The incident resulted in the death of five soldiers and the arrest of a senior commander, Lt. Gen. M.V. Suchindra Kumar, a name long associated with Indian strategic command structures.
Though largely ignored or suppressed in the Indian mainstream press, this internal conflict could have far-reaching implications, not only for India’s military reputation but also for regional stability. It prompts a deeper analysis of what lies beneath the surface of Indian military discipline, particularly in the volatile terrain of Kashmir.
According to reports, the firefight took place in the Baramulla district, a zone of perennial tension between Indian forces and local populations. However, this time, the guns were not pointed outward but inward. The confrontation between the BSF and the 13th Sikh Light Infantry — reportedly stemming from operational disagreements and possibly long-standing ethnic tensions — marked a rare and unsettling escalation.
In a parallel and equally significant development, Lt. Gen. Suchindra Kumar — former head of military intelligence and Vice Chief of Army Staff — was arrested and flown to New Delhi under high security. While official Indian sources have maintained a stony silence, leaks suggest he openly criticized the Indian government’s role in the Pulwama-Pahalgam region, indirectly holding it responsible for sowing discord among the forces.
These two events, occurring within days of each other, are not mere coincidences. They reflect deep systemic issues, especially in regions like Kashmir where military presence is both expansive and prolonged. Over-deployment, psychological fatigue, and politicization of command structures have created fissures that can no longer be concealed under a veneer of control.
The ethnic dimension of this conflict cannot be overlooked. Sikh soldiers have historically formed a proud and loyal segment of the Indian Army. However, repeated incidents of sidelining, underrepresentation in strategic command roles, and alleged surveillance by intelligence agencies have bred resentment. For these tensions to explode in an armed confrontation indicates a crisis of cohesion.
Perhaps more concerning is the near-total blackout of this news in the Indian media. While Pakistani and Arab outlets have covered the story extensively, Indian channels have remained conspicuously quiet. This calculated silence signals a dangerous trend — one where public perception is carefully engineered, even at the cost of truth and institutional accountability. It raises a troubling question: what else is being concealed from the Indian public?
Internationally, India has projected itself as a rising power with a disciplined, battle-hardened military. But such incidents challenge that narrative. For regional powers like Pakistan and China, this internal instability could alter strategic calculations. For Kashmiris, it exposes the deep dysfunction in the very forces that claim to bring them stability.
The arrest of a top general and the deaths of five soldiers at the hands of fellow countrymen should have sent shockwaves through any democracy. Instead, the muted domestic response reflects a culture of denial. And denial, history reminds us, often precedes decline.
In conclusion, whether this event marks a singular breakdown or a larger unraveling remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: the Indian Army, long considered the spine of India’s strategic projection, now appears fractured. If New Delhi continues to suppress such realities instead of confronting them, the cost may not just be internal disorder — it may be regional instability on an unprecedented scale.
