LEADING FROM THE FRONT: THE MANEKSHAW WAY

Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw holds a distinguished place among India’s military leaders post-independence. His career in the Army, marked by significant political and military events, was exceptional. With the country’s independence and the complex integration of Jammu and Kashmir, Manekshaw played an influential role in shaping the Indian Army and its unfolding history via the circumstances of 1971. His leadership was particularly impactful in guiding India to victory in the 1971 war. He also played a vital role in addressing issues in the aftermath of the 1962 conflict with China and the military operations of 1965. Throughout these crucial periods in India’s history, Manekshaw’s strategic expertise and leadership were remarkable.

Sam Hormusji Framji Jamshedji Manekshaw, born on 3 April 1914 in Amritsar, came from a middle-class Parsi family. His parents, Hormusji and Heerabai Manekshaw, met while Hormusji was a medical student in Bombay. They later married and moved from their home in Valsad, Gujarat, to Amritsar, hoping for a better life.

When Sam, their fifth child out of six, was born, nobody could have predicted the significant role he would play in history. Born just months before World War I erupted in August 1914, Sam’s early years coincided with a tumultuous period in world history. Although too young to remember the war, which ended just before his fifth birthday, he would later leave his mark as a young officer in World War II and eventually lead the Indian Army to a significant victory in 1971.

Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw’s distinctive leadership qualities and personality, partially shaped at his school, Sherwood College in Nainital, reflected not only the institution’s academic rigour but also its influence in developing resilience and resourcefulness. This renowned school, which counts among its alumni Major Somnath Sharma, the first recipient of the Param Vir Chakra, and General Vishwa Nath Sharma, a decorated former Chief of the Army Staff (and the younger brother of Major Somnath Sharma), played a significant role in Manekshaw’s formative years. He humorously credited his early ‘battles’ for everyday necessities at Sherwood for instilling in him a fighting spirit, as he shared in a 1969 address to the students there. His jests about these skirmishes for toothbrushes and towels, the questionable food, and the lack of ‘scared faces’ among the students highlighted how these experiences prepared him for future military challenges, including the Burma campaign.¹

Manekshaw’s career, marked by his unique blend of humour and directness, also saw its share of controversies, particularly in a traditional military setting.² His open and sometimes humorous comments on military and political strategies occasionally caused tensions with political figures and sometimes upset even military officers. It showed the challenges he faced in maintaining his individual style within the confines of protocol.

However, he was always well-meaning and good-hearted, with an open, affable personality that did not hold grudges. After school, Sam Manekshaw aimed to study medicine in England, as initially promised by his father. However, being deemed too young, he instead enrolled at Hindu Sabha College, Amritsar, and completed his intermediate science studies, earning a third division in the examination at the University of the Punjab, Lahore.³ In July 1932, Manekshaw appeared for the Indian Military Academy entrance exam in Delhi and did well in the interview, with a score of 405 out of 500. His performance placed him sixth among fifteen cadets selected through open competition.⁴ This pivotal moment marked the beginning of his illustrious military career.

Sam Manekshaw’s admission into the Indian Military Academy in 1932 set the stage for a career that would later redefine military leadership in India. He was one of the Academy’s first batch of 40 Gentlemen Cadets, known as “The Pioneers.” Remarkably, this batch produced not just one, but three future army chiefs, including Manekshaw for India, General Smith Dun for Burma, and General Muhammad Musa Khan for Pakistan.⁵ Initially, he was part of a programme for commissioning into a technical arm, but he was shifted to a non-technical wing due to lower grades in mathematics.⁶ He moved into infantry training, and that is where he showed his forte in the coming years.

At the Academy, Manekshaw showed early signs of the unconventional leader he would become. He frequently clashed with academy rules, yet displayed qualities of resilience and leadership, evidenced by his selection to corporal while a cadet. However, an incident during weekend leave in Mussoorie, where he was marked absent for a morning drill, led to his demotion.⁷ Despite this setback, his company commander, Major D. T. Punch-Cowan, highlighted Manekshaw’s positive traits like command ability and a cheerful disposition, noting his popularity and active role in social and athletic activities at the Academy.⁸ These experiences paint a picture of a young Manekshaw as both a rule-breaker and a capable leader, hinting at the sometimes unconventional yet effective leadership style he would later be known for.

Captain Sam Manekshaw, who was then in charge of a company in his battalion of the Sikh Regiment, faced a significant leadership test in 1942 during the Burma Campaign of World War II. Speaking Punjabi with ease, he had built a close bond with his Sikh soldiers, which would come in handy. Numerous casualties were sustained by the battalion during the Burma Campaign, necessitating promotions within the ranks. During a session chaired by Commanding Officer Lieutenant Colonel Edward to choose applicants for promotion to the rank of naik, a problematic soldier, Surat Singh’s situation was discussed. Given Singh’s prior disciplinary record, Manekshaw advised against his promotion, which led to the promotion of junior soldiers in his place.

Surat Singh threatened to kill Manekshaw after finding out he had been passed over for a promotion. Manekshaw arrived back at his strangely quiet company that evening and was told by his second-in-command, Subedar Balwant Singh, of the threat and that Surat Singh had been arrested and disarmed. With audacity, Manekshaw challenged Surat Singh to carry out his threat and held out a revolver for him to use. Surat Singh cried and showed remorse. Manekshaw dismissed the case as a result.

This incident not only showcased Manekshaw’s unorthodox approach to leadership and discipline but also his understanding of the importance of maintaining authority and respect among his men. By facing the threat head-on and not showing fear, he demonstrated physical courage and a deep understanding of a soldier’s psychology. His actions had a profound impact on Surat Singh, who became a disciplined and loyal soldier, exemplifying the transformative effect of Manekshaw’s leadership style.⁹

During the intense battle for the Sittang Bridge in World War II, Sam Manekshaw, commanding the Sikh Company of the 4/12 Frontier Force Regiment, showed remarkable leadership under pressure. He was instrumental in holding off fierce Japanese attacks between 19 and 23 February 1942. During a counterattack, Manekshaw was critically wounded, sustaining nine bullet injuries in his stomach from a machine-gun burst. For this act of conspicuous bravery and exceptional devotion to duty, he was awarded the third-highest British India gallantry award, the Military Cross. The decision to award him the Military Cross was made by Major General D. T. Cowan, the general officer commanding the division, who came down to congratulate Major Sam Manekshaw on the success of this operation. But the general, on seeing the serious wounds of this brave officer, felt that Sam Manekshaw would not come through. Hence, he pinned the Military Cross on the spot. During that period, the convention in the British Army was that a Military Cross could not be awarded posthumously.¹⁰

His orderly, Sepoy Sher Singh, had helped save his life. Demonstrating extraordinary loyalty, Sher Singh carried the severely injured Manekshaw to the regimental aid post for immediate medical attention. The field medical officer, a Captain Diwan, attended to Manekshaw, removing the bullets and stitching up his wounds, and Manekshaw regained consciousness. The surgeon asked Manekshaw about his injuries. Despite his grave condition, Manekshaw humorously replied, “A bloody mule kicked me.” This response, reflecting his indomitable spirit and sense of humour even in dire circumstances, elicited laughter from the surgeon. Recognising Manekshaw’s resilience and buoyant spirit, the surgeon remarked, “By your sense of humour, I think you are worth saving.”¹¹

Such incidents amidst life-threatening situations highlight not only Manekshaw’s courage and endurance but also the exceptional bond of trust and loyalty he shared with his men, with an ability to maintain an easy, light-hearted demeanour no matter what. These incidents exemplify his extraordinary character and leadership qualities.

After recovering from his injuries in World War II, Major Sam Manekshaw was briefly discharged to join his family before attending the 8th Staff College course in Quetta, from August to December 1943.¹² Excelling in the course, he was appointed brigade major to the Razmak Brigade in Waziristan. This critical role involved overseeing operations and serving as the chief of staff to a brigade commander. Following this, Manekshaw returned to active combat, joining the 9/12 Frontier Force Regiment in Burma. In the final stages of the war, he was involved in intense conflicts with the retreating Japanese forces. Post-war, in November 1945, Manekshaw was assigned as a staff officer to General Daisy in Indochina (now Vietnam), where he played a key role in the rehabilitation of over 10,000 prisoners of war.¹³ He was also sent as a spokesperson and representative of the British Indian Army in 1946 for a lecture tour in Australia, to emphasise India’s war effort and the accomplishments of its armed forces.¹⁴

As the first Indian officer to hold the rank of GSO-1 in the Military Operations Directorate following Indian independence in 1947, Manekshaw was positioned at the centre of strategic and operational military decision-making at a time of violence during the Partition and the start of Pakistani intrusions, and subsequently in the 1947–48 conflict itself.¹⁵ During this period, he interacted with several officers who were to play different roles in later years. One was his fellow cadet at the Academy, Yahya Khan, who joined the Pakistan Army. As is known, General Yahya Khan became the military dictator of Pakistan and was defeated in the 1971 war, ironically when Sam was the Chief of the Army Staff. The other was then Major (later Lieutenant General) S. K. Sinha, who became the Governor of Jammu and Kashmir several decades later.¹⁶

Post-independence, Sam Manekshaw’s career was a mix of professional growth and challenges. He initially commanded the 167 Infantry Brigade in Ferozepur. Later, his roles evolved from Director of Military Training at Army Headquarters to Commandant of the Infantry School in Mhow. After attending the Imperial Defence College in London, he was promoted to major general, commanding the 26 Infantry Division.¹⁷

Manekshaw’s candid nature was evident in an interaction with the then Defence Minister V. K. Krishna Menon during his visit to Manekshaw’s 26 Infantry Division in Jammu. When asked about his views on General Thimayya, the Chief of the Army Staff, Manekshaw refused to comment, emphasising the impropriety of such inquiries within the military hierarchy.¹⁸ This forthrightness was unanticipated by Menon, accustomed to more subservient attitudes, and it inadvertently sowed seeds of future challenges for Manekshaw.

His straightforwardness led to an inquiry initiated by Menon and Lieutenant General B. M. Kaul, the Chief of the General Staff, accusing Manekshaw of being “too Anglicised” and “anti-national.” Although cleared of all charges by the Western Army Commander, Lieutenant General Daulet Singh, the incident delayed his progression, as his juniors were promoted before him.¹⁹

Even as the dust had probably settled on the squabble initiated by the Defence Minister, India’s humiliating defeat in the 1962 border war led to upheavals. Mr Krishna Menon resigned, and General Kaul was relieved of command of IV Corps. In November 1962, Manekshaw, who had previously been treated most unfairly by these individuals, was promoted to the command of IV Corps amidst other major changes in a defeated and demoralised Army.²⁰ As a corps commander, Manekshaw’s leadership style was a combination of assertiveness, humour and self-assurance. He fully intended to reinstate discipline and instil confidence in the Corps. In his initial address to the staff officers, he prohibited any further withdrawals, and said that if these were warranted, it would only be via written orders.²¹

General Manekshaw’s finest hour, however, was yet to come. Having become the Chief of the Army Staff in June 1969, it would fall upon him to be the primary player in the military victory for India that led to the creation of a new country, Bangladesh, from the oppressed half of Pakistan in the east.

In March 1971, in a crucial meeting with Prime Minister Indira Gandhi during the India–Pakistan tensions, General Sam Manekshaw displayed his strategic wisdom and candour. When urged to take military action in East Pakistan, he advised against it, citing the need for proper preparation and highlighting the impending monsoon’s impact on military operations. Manekshaw also expressed concerns about the Indian Air Force’s readiness and the potential Chinese intervention. Asserting that a hasty decision could lead to defeat, he persuaded the Prime Minister to postpone the action.²² His strategic foresight and insistence on careful planning ultimately led to the successful execution of operations at a later stage, showcasing his leadership and tactical acumen.

From November 1962 to May 1969, General Sam Manekshaw, serving in the eastern sector, gained extensive knowledge of the area. This experience led him to focus on attacking East Pakistan while maintaining an overall defensive position in the west. Initially, in 1971, Eastern Command’s mission was to defeat Pakistani forces and take control of key regions in East Pakistan. This plan later expanded to include the liberation of the entire area. Notably, in the early planning stages, General Manekshaw did not include capturing Dhaka in his orders, likely due to national security considerations.²³

General Sam Manekshaw’s strategic approach during his tenure in the eastern sector, focusing mainly on offensive operations against East Pakistan while maintaining a defensive stance in the west, can be critiqued from two significant perspectives. Firstly, this strategy potentially overlooked opportunities on the western front. By adopting a primarily defensive posture there, the Indian Army might have missed exploiting certain vulnerabilities in the Pakistani defence.

Secondly, the initial omission of Dhaka from the operational targets in the eastern sector could be viewed as a strategic oversight. As the political and logistical nerve centre of East Pakistan, Dhaka’s capture could have served as a decisive blow to Pakistani forces, potentially shortening the conflict and reducing its overall toll. This decision not to target Dhaka initially might suggest either an underestimation of its strategic importance or a cautious approach that prioritised gradual territorial gains over a more direct approach and capture of a critical target. However, he changed his mind when these changes were suggested by Eastern Command and his own staff.²⁴

General Sam Manekshaw’s exemplary leadership and strategic acumen were pivotal in India’s victory in the 1971 Indo-Pak War. Utilising the eight-month preparatory period from March to December 1971, he meticulously crafted a comprehensive war strategy, drawing upon his World War II experience as well as lessons learnt from the 1962 debacle and the 1965 war. As Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, he fostered a collaborative environment with the other two chiefs, ensuring a reasonably well-coordinated military strategy by supremely confident leadership in the armed forces. His war strategy, implemented from 4 December, led to the swift surrender of Pakistani troops in Bangladesh, culminating in the historic moment on 16 December, when 93,000 Pakistani soldiers under the Pakistani Lieutenant General Niazi surrendered unconditionally.²⁵ This decisive victory not only led to the creation of Bangladesh but also established Manekshaw as a distinguished military leader. His humane treatment of Pakistani prisoners of war after the conflict, adhering to the Geneva Convention, further exemplified his integrity and respect for international law.²⁶ The announcement of his continuation as the Chief of the Army Staff beyond his retirement age, and his subsequent promotion to Field Marshal in January 1973, were fitting acknowledgements of his extraordinary contributions to India’s military performance. It is of note that he received the very high civilian award of the Padma Vibhushan for his service and his role in the 1971 war.

A significant chapter in the annals of Indian military history came to an end with the demise of Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw on 27 June 2008. His death, at the age of 94, was not just the loss of a legendary soldier but also the ending of a chapter characterised by extraordinary leadership and military brilliance.

In his passing, Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw was honoured not only within India but also globally, as reflected in the outpouring of obituaries and tributes from around the world. Such widespread admiration underscores the extraordinary impact of his legacy that transcended national boundaries. Manekshaw’s life and career embodied the epitome of military leadership, marked by a blend of valour, wisdom and integrity. His influence extended beyond mere tactical and strategic mastery; it encapsulated the spirit of dignified soldiering and principled conduct in the face of adversity. As a respected figure in Indian military history, his legacy continues to inspire future generations, highlighting the profound role of exemplary leadership in shaping not just military victories, but also the course of nations.