But, there was a problem. In democracies, the defence minister does not establish direct communication with troops or go around shoring up their morale like the marshal of the army in the Soviet tradition. He represents the higher, elected, constitutional authority which provides political direction and control, strategic leadership and means to look after the nation's defence. If the minister takes over that role, it diminishes the office of the chiefs. This is precisely what happened in the past three years.
Some generals fret about it, some suffer in silence.
Some also exploited this new approach in a way so reminiscent of the Krishna Menon era. There are two essentials to civil-military relations in a democracy. First, the soldiers must fully defer to civilian authority. Second, no civilian should ever acquire an image among an army larger than its generals. For a politician, the adulation of the soldier is touching, and heady.