From 'Samudraraja' to 'Garuda Nayak', Imagining BJP's Vision of an 'Atmanirbhar', Sanskritised Military

Chandigarh: Since taking office in 2014, the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government has actively championed the cause of "reclaiming India’s cultural identity from centuries of colonial dominance."

While most of these efforts have targeted historical, educational, legal, bureaucratic, and lisnguistic domains, amongst others, it has also begun ‘decolonising’ India’s military by steadily discarding colonial-era symbols, rituals, and conventions.

The Indian Army (IA) evolved under the East India Company, and later the British government in the 18th and 19th centuries, whilst the Royal Indian Navy and the Royal Indian Air Force came into being in 1934 and 1932 respectively. After independence the latter two services became the Indian Navy (IN) and the Indian Air Force (IAF).

Freeing Indian soldiers’ minds from 'colonial shadows and cobwebs,'

Consequently, over the past 11 years, the government has repeatedly stressed the need to free Indian soldiers’ minds from “colonial shadows and cobwebs,” insisting that true decolonisation must begin by redefining core institutions – starting with the ranks on their shoulders. This vision has received enthusiastic and untrammelled support from the top brass of all three services.

A symbolic turning point came in September 2022 with the INs decision to drop the St. George’s Cross from its ensign – a stark colonial holdover from the Royal Navy – marking a clear break from inherited symbols that clashed with India’s postcolonial identity. This was replaced with a new ensign inspired by the seal of Maratha naval icon Chhatrapati Shivaji, marking a deliberate civilisational reorientation and aligning domestic military symbolism with Indic heritage.

Alongside, kurta-pyjamas –once proscribed– were officially incorporated in 2023 as acceptable attire within IN messes, wardrooms, formal events, and official establishments, marking a distinct break from Western dress norms and reinforcing further a shift toward civilisational self-assertion. This move, however, is observed more in abeyance than practice, as a wide cross-section of senior veterans, and many serving officers consider it somewhat de rigueur, and have simply shunned it.

Simultaneously, naval epaulettes and army regimental insignia have either undergone redesign or were under review to integrate indigenous symbols, including references to historical Indian warriors, epic battles, and classical motifs, thereby emphasising a uniquely domestic identity, untethered from colonial legacies.

The study of ancient Indian texts like Kautilya’s Arthashastra and Bhagavad Gita has also been made mandatory in military institutions, and in October 2023, the IA launched Operation Udhhav (Evolution) to study ancient Sanskrit and Tamil texts from the 4th century BCE to the 8th century CE.

The objective, according to Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, who inaugurated the scheme at the United Services Institute think-tank in New Delhi, was to ‘rediscover’ the country’s rich heritage in ‘statecraft, warcraft, diplomacy and grand strategy’ and to operationally adapt it all in the Subcontinent's prevailing nuclear weapons environment.

Controversial plan to restructure or disband regiments organised along caste or ethnic lines

Other than the Arthashastra, Udbhav concentrates on the writings of the post-Mauryan Kamandaka (Nitisara) and those of the Tamil poet Thiruvalluvar (Tirukkural) to ‘bridge historical concepts’ with the contemporary, and to ‘integrate age-old wisdom with modern military pedagogy, according to the Press Information Bureau.

Furthermore, in line with government instructions, the IA’s Adjutant General’s Branch too is reportedly preparing sweeping proposals to discard colonial-era traditions centred on either reconsidering, or eliminating long-established dress codes, pipe and drum bands, colour presentations, and investiture ceremonies.

Longstanding affiliations between IA units and foreign regiments, especially those forged during the two World Wars were also likely to soon be dissolved to scrap symbolic ties to India’s imperial past.

One of the most sensitive and controversial aspects of this overhaul is the reported plan to restructure –or even disband –regiments organised along caste and ethnic lines like the Sikh, Gurkha, Jat, and Rajput regiments. Originally raised by the British under their divisive “martial races” theory, these formations were viewed by the government and its supporters as relics of colonialism that undermined a unified, pan-Indian military identity.

They argue that it was a necessary step toward creating a modern, indigenised force, all-India-all-class force reflective of India’s civilisational ethos, rather than of its imperial inheritance.

Many veterans had warned that this would erode the IA's core ethos of Naam(honour), namak(loyalty), and nishan (regimental flag), the three fundamental principles that bind soldiers through shared identity and legacy, and critics fear their loss could weaken the force.

The IA was also on the verge of re-christening several training companies or units at the Indian Military Academy (IMA) in Dehra Dun, named after famous World War 2 battles in which thousands of Indian soldiers fighting under British command had died, as part of this ‘decolonisation’ initiative.

Seven of the IMAs' 12 training companies – Kohima, Al Alamein, Miektyila, Sangro, Imphal, Karen and Cassino – honouring famous battles, in which Indian troops decisively determined the victorious outcome were, much to the chagrin of former alumni being renamed after domestic campaigns conducted after Independence, to vindicate the BJP’s ‘swadeshi’ agenda.

The new corresponding names included Nathula, Dograi, Chushul, Badgam, Drass, Basantar and Walong. The names of the remaining five companies – Naushera, Poonch, Zojila, Jessore and Sinhgarh –are likely to remain unchanged.

Sanskritisation of the military’s overall identity

And earlier this week, the IA announced a series of Sanskrit-inspired names in its evolving restructuring which further encouraged and legitimised the Sanskritisation of the military’s overall identity. This involved the announcement of new formations like Rudra (Fierce) Brigades, Bhairav (Terrifying) Commando Units, Shaktibaan (Powerful) Artillery Regiments, and of deploying Divyastra (celestial weapon) systems.

A cross-section of veterans and analysts, all of whom declined to be named, considered these monikers more than just aesthetic or cosmetic changes, but part of a broader ‘civilisational’ reimagining of the armed forces, seeking to draw upon hoary Indian martial traditions, iconography, and language to create a distinct post-colonial identity.

That being said, it all begs the fundamental question: Is it not time for the BJP to also change the rank structure too in all three services by replacing British-inherited designations with ‘Indianised’ titles rooted in Sanskrit, regional languages, and indigenous martial traditions?

While uniforms, symbols, and rituals have been steadily ‘Sanskritised’ – rank designations across the three services remain firmly British, rooted in colonial hierarchies and values. If the BJP’s broader aim is to reclaim sovereign control over India’s military identity, then ranks and titles are the next logical frontier needing reform.

After all, what’s more colonial than continuing with “General,” “Admiral,” or “Air Chief Marshal”? In the BJP’s Hindutva worldview, changing the nomenclature isn’t cosmetic – it’s simply civilisational.

So, if not the prevailing designations, what should the Sanskritised – or new-age Indian military ranks be?

Also Read: No Takers for Modi's Plan to 'Decolonise' Navy by Introducing Kurta-Pyjama in Dress Code

Online research, drawing on ancient Indian military structures – from the Maurya, Gupta and Maratha eras-along with Hindu vernacular traditions, has yielded intriguing alternatives, rooted in age-old leadership titles, spiritual themes, and localised philosophical concepts.

Hence, the proposed indigenised or atmanirbhar officer rank structure in the IA, the largest and most visible of the three-armed forces, could incorporate designations like Deshpalak (Field Marshal), Trisena-Adhipati (Chief of Defence Staff or Lord of the three Forces), Sarvadhyaksha (General or Supreme administrator in the Mauryan tradition) and Mahasenadhipaati (Lieutenant General or Great Lord of the Army).

Other ranks could be designated as Mahayoddha (Major-General or Great Warrior), Yuddhanayak (Brigadier or Leader of battle), Senapati (colonel), Upa-Senapati (Lieutenant Colonel), Mahasenanayak (Major), Senanayak (Captain) and Yuvanayak (Lieutenant).

For the IN, which shares close historical and structural ties with the Royal Navy, new rank structures could draw on India’s maritime legacy – from the Chola naval expeditions in the 11th century, the Zamorin fleets of Calicut to the Maratha Admiral Kanhoji Angre, whom Prime Minister Narendra Modi often praises.

'Tarangapati' to 'Vayusenapati', it's all in a a name

These could potentially be Samudraraja (Naval Chief of Staff or King of the Ocean), Mahavarunapati (Vice Admiral or Great Commander under Varuna-Vedic deity of oceans), Varunadhipati (Rear Admiral or Lord-Under-Ravuna) and Mahasamudradhipa (Commodore or Great Lord of the Sea). Junior ranks could include Jalsenapati (Commander of naval forces), Tarangapati (Lieutenant Commander or Lord of the Waves), and Naupati (Lieutenant or young boat leader).

And, in the IAF, the youngest of India’s three armed forces, the shift to comparable ranks could be aimed at instilling a deeper sense of identity among aviators by linking modern air power with mythological figures like Garuda – mythical bird and mount or vahana of Lord Vishnu and Vayu – the Hindu God of wind and air – and historical Indian contributions to astronomy and aerodynamics.

Therefore, these could comprise Akashadhiraaj (Marshal of the Air Force or Sky King), Vayu Mahadhipati (Air Chief Marshal or Supreme Lord of the Air), Mahavayusenapti (Air Marshal or Great Commander of Air Army), Vayusenapati (Air Vice Marshal or Commander of Air Army) and Akashpati (Commodore or Lord of the Sky).

The remaining designations could easily be Meghasena Dhipati (Group Captain or Lord of Cloud Force), Pakshapaksha Senapati (Wing Commander or Commander of Wings), Garuda Nayak (Squadron Leader or Leader of Garudas), Vimananayak (Flight Lieutenant or Aircraft leader) and Tarang Nayak (Flying officer or Wave Leader).

But, as India under the BJP aspires to become Vishwaguru – a global leader and moral compass – its armed forces adopting deeply Sanskritised rank structures could prove a double-edged sword, in an increasingly interoperable world, where joint operations, UN peacekeeping, and multinational exercises demand clear, universal military communication.

Hence, ranks like Tarang Nayak or Mahasenanayak might raise eyebrows, or at the very least, require subtitles. To offset these handicaps, some veterans have wryly suggested a dual-ranking system, pairing traditional titles with colonial ones to avoid confusion during international deployments. After all, even the Russian, Chinese and Iranian militaries – despite their distinct localised rank structures manage to coordinate with global forces.

So perhaps there will, after all, be room for an Indian Trisena-Adhipati to salute a visiting general – as long as neither insists on translating titles mid-parade. Because in the end, the Indian military isn’t just about waging wars and winning them, but about ceremonially renaming the machinery in Sanskrit that does, without demur from the serving brass.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.