Story – The Veteran and the Aspirant

Humor 

THE VETERAN AND THE ASPIRANT

Fiction Short Story

By

VIKRAM KARVE

________

Here is a conversation between a Military Veteran (V) and a bright youngster aspiring to join the Military – a Military Aspirant (A)

_________

Dramatis Personae

V = Military Veteran

A = Military Aspirant

_______

TETE-A-TETE BETWEEN VETERAN AND ASPIRANT

______

Military Veteran (V): Tell me – why do you want to join the military…?

Military Aspirant (A): To “serve the nation”.

V: You want to join the military to serve the nation…?

A: Yes, Sir.

V: Do you understand the meaning of the word “nation”…?

A: Sir – nation means a country – the land – the people living there…

V: You have got it all wrong – at least in the context of the military.

A: Sir – what does “nation” mean…?

V: Well – “nation” means “ruler” – whoever rules you is your “nation” – earlier – in the days of monarchy – “Kings” were the rulers – so the “nation” meant your “King” – today – we have democracy – so – the “nation” means “politicians” – and – of course – in dictatorships – it is the all-powerful dictator who is the “nation”.

A: Sir – are you saying that whoever rules your country is the “nation”…?

V: That’s right – at least in the context of the military.

A: So – serving the nation means serving the ruler of your country…?

V: Yes – and in a democracy – serving the “nation” means serving “politicians’ – who are the “rulers”.

A: It is quite confusing to me.

V: Let me give you a recent example. Do you take interest in current affairs – do you see the latest news…?

A: Yes, Sir.

V: You must have observed how the strongest military superpower has withdrawn its soldiers from a foreign country after 20 years…?

A: Yes, Sir.

V: Just imagine the plight of the soldiers. Around 20 years ago – a politician sent them to a foreign land to fight – and now – another politician is withdrawing them back – and – we have “status quo ante” – all the military gains will be nullified – but a large number of soldiers have lost their lives and many more were injured – some soldiers must have been disabled for life – and many others may have been affected by PTSD – scarred for life.

A: Yes, Sir – a tragic situation – all their sacrifices have gone in vain.

V: Exactly – it is the soldiers who always have to risk the life and limb and even sacrifice their lives just to satisfy the vanity and “whims and fancies’ of politicians who themselves remain safe and sound – far away from the battlefield.

A: Sir – I never thought of it from this perspective. I always thought that soldiers fought for the “nation”.

V: That is why I asked you the moot question: “What is the meaning of the term “nation”…? Or more specifically – who is the “nation”…?”

A: You are right, Sir – it is the politicians who are the nation.

V: As far as the soldier is concerned – whoever rules the country is the “nation”. In today’s democracy it is politicians – in olden days it was Kings and Queens who were the “nation” – for whom soldiers had to sacrifice their lives.

A: Yes, Sir – history tells us of so many wars fought at the behest of Kings.

V: An ancient example is the famous Trojan War – a prince elopes with the wife of another king – and – this results in a huge war when the king tried to recover his “stolen” wife. The war lasts for more than nine years – and thousands of soldiers from both sides die in the war. The soldiers have to sacrifice their lives for the vanity of their kings who love the same woman.

A: Yes, Sir – I see your point – there are many such examples in history where soldiers had to sacrifice their lives just because their kings wanted to go to war – for a variety of reasons.

V: At least – in the olden days – Kings led their Army on the battlefield and fought themselves – and many Kings died fighting too. But today’s politicians – they make soldiers fight – but tell me – have you ever seen politicians risking their own lives on the battlefield…?

A: That is true, Sir – history tells us of so many “warrior kings” – but – we hardly see any “warrior politicians” nowadays.

V: To come back to recent events – politicians send soldiers to foreign lands to fight a war – and then – after 20 years – politicians withdraw the soldiers – and the brave soldiers have to suffer the humiliation of a “defeat” – for no fault of theirs.

A: Yes, Sir – it must be very demoralizing for the soldiers.

V: This has happened many times earlier too – worldwide – where soldiers have had to suffer the ignominy of “defeat” due to the whimsical, capricious and Machiavellian decisions of politicians – armistices, treaties, sudden U-Turns in policy – “so-called” diplomacy by politicians – sometimes done without consulting the soldiers – where the sacrifices made by soldiers have gone in vain.

A: Politicians keep saying “the sacrifices of our brave soldiers will not go in vain” – but it seems all rhetoric.

V: You are right – politicians may indulge in jingoistic rhetoric to whip up sentiment – but tell me – in many cases – don’t politicians use soldiers like “cannon fodder” to achieve their political ambitions…?

A: Why don’t soldiers refuse to do things which they feel are wrong…?

V: They can’t. Soldiers have to blindly obey orders given by politicians even if they feel that the political decisions may be militarily unsound. Tell me – in the recent evacuation – do you think all soldiers agreed with the political decision to suddenly withdraw from the conflict zone leaving behind a huge amount of military hardware and weapons – and with the ignominy of being labelled a “defeated” army – all due to a political decision…? Think about it.

A: It must be so demoralizing for the soldiers.

V: And – when new politicians replace the earlier politicians as “rulers” – a soldier has to now obey his new “rulers” – whose military policies may be quite different – and it can be quite confusing – isn’t it…?

A: Yes, Sir.

V: Think about what we have discussed – introspect and analyze for yourself.

A: Sir – it was so insightful talking to you – I am beginning to see things from a new perspective.

V: Tell me – what is the “moral of the story”…?

A: Sir – “nation” means “rulers” – whoever rules you is your “nation” – in a democracy – politicians rule – so – “nation” means “politicians”. Hence – serving the nation is tantamount to serving politicians.

V: You said it – so succinctly – in a nutshell.

_______ 

VIKRAM KARVE

Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:

1. This story is a fictional spoof, satire, pure fiction, just for fun and humor, no offence is meant to anyone, so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.

2. All Stories in this Blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the stories are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:

No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.

Copyright © Vikram Karve (all rights reserved)

© vikram karve., all rights reserved.