While former Army Chief General M.M. Naravane has endorsed the statement issued by his publisher amid the controversy over his memoir, he has not explicitly denied the authenticity of the leaked excerpts from the yet-to-be-published book. In the excerpts, he is reportedly critical of the Modi government’s handling of the August 2020 confrontation with the Chinese PLA on the heights of Rechin La and Rezang La (R2) in eastern Ladakh.
Penguin Random House India (PRHI) has issued a formal clarification stating that it holds the exclusive publishing rights to the memoir Four Stars of Destiny and that the book has not yet been published, following reports of unauthorised copies circulating in the public domain.
Although the manuscript is still subject to approval by the Ministry of Defence, the ongoing controversy has sparked broader questions about accountability within the leadership of the Indian armed forces — an institution known for its discipline and hierarchy. In the reported excerpts, Gen Naravane appears to criticise certain operational decisions during the eastern Ladakh crisis, including those taken at the corps and division levels.
Notably, Lt Gen Harinder Singh, who served as the 14 Corps Commander during the initial phase of the standoff, was awarded the Param Vishisht Seva Medal (PVSM) in 2021, reportedly on the recommendation of the same Army Chief.
Gen Naravane assumed office as Army Chief in December 2019 on the basis of seniority, succeeding Gen Bipin Rawat after the latter became India’s first Chief of Defence Staff (CDS). At the time, questions were also raised in some quarters about whether future appointments to top military positions should weigh seniority alone or give greater emphasis to operational experience and merit.
The controversy surrounding the memoir has revived that debate. As India navigates complex security challenges — from tensions along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) to cross-border terrorism along the Line of Control (LoC) and International Border (IB) — the issue of leadership accountability and criteria for top appointments has come into sharper focus.
Supporters of a merit-based approach argue that key military, paramilitary and intelligence positions should increasingly prioritise demonstrated performance in combat and crisis management. Others maintain that the long-established system of seniority ensures institutional stability and prevents politicisation.
With India emerging as a major military and economic power, the discussion over balancing seniority, merit and accountability within the national security framework is likely to continue. (Agencies)
