Table of Contents
General Upendra Dwivedi, the newly appointed Indian Army Chief, is facing growing criticism after he visited Jagadguru Rambhadracharya’s ashram on Wednesday while in military uniform. The visit, made in an official capacity and widely circulated through media coverage, has raised concerns over the military’s alignment with religious and potentially partisan symbols, which critics say undermines India’s secular and apolitical military tradition.
Veteran journalist Sushant Singh took to social media platform X (formerly Twitter) to comment on the visit, stating:
“Civil-military relations are strained when military leaders align with partisan religious agendas, undermining the apolitical ethos of India’s secular armed forces.”
His remarks have since sparked broader debate across media and political circles, with many questioning whether the military leadership is breaching constitutional boundaries by openly associating with religious institutions.
Context: War with Pakistan and Heightened Tensions
General Dwivedi’s controversial visit comes just weeks after a brief but intense four-day conflict between India and Pakistan, which erupted following the Pahalgam attack in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). The attack resulted in 26 tourist deaths, with India blaming Pakistan for orchestrating the incident — a claim Pakistan strongly denied, and for which India has yet to present concrete evidence.
The war, which began due to India’s military response, was named “Operation Bunyan-um-Marsoos” by Pakistan, which retaliated forcefully. According to official Pakistani military sources:
- Six Indian Air Force jets, including three Rafales, were downed.
- Dozens of Indian drones were destroyed.
- Several Indian military installations were targeted across multiple fronts.
The 87-hour-long war concluded with a ceasefire brokered by the United States on May 10, preventing further escalation between the nuclear-armed neighbors.
Army’s Religious Conduct: A Growing Concern
The incident has drawn further attention due to a directive issued by the Indian Army last year, which explicitly reminded its personnel to adhere to dress code regulations, especially regarding religious markers and accessories while in uniform. This followed incidents where officers were seen on social media wearing visible religious chains and symbols, prompting the Army to reinforce its apolitical image.
COAS Munir: Pakistan Will Never Accept Indian Hegemony or Water Threats
Despite this, General Dwivedi’s highly publicized appearance at a religious shrine has fueled concerns that military discipline and secular values are being compromised at the highest level.
Critics argue that such actions blur the line between religious endorsement and official state conduct, potentially alienating members of India’s diverse religious and ethnic communities and threatening the neutral stance expected of the armed forces.
Military Leadership’s Silence and Strategic Implications
Neither the Indian Defence Ministry nor General Dwivedi has issued an official clarification on the visit, despite the growing backlash. The silence has been interpreted by some as tacit approval or indifference toward the incident’s implications on civil-military relations and secular governance.
Given the recent military conflict with Pakistan and ongoing sensitivities in Kashmir and border regions, the Indian Army’s image is under increased scrutiny — both domestically and internationally. Experts fear that the erosion of secular discipline within the ranks could affect operational unity and public trust in the armed forces.
India’s Regional Standing and International Diplomacy
While the United States played a key role in mediating a ceasefire, the international community continues to observe developments along the India-Pakistan border with caution. The recent war and now the controversy surrounding General Dwivedi’s religious visit are likely to influence India’s diplomatic narrative, particularly in contexts involving religious tolerance, military professionalism, and regional stability.
