Former Navy Chief Admiral Arun Prakash has suggested that the length of the service in the Agnipath scheme should be up to 10 years instead of the current 4 years. He believes that six months of training for soldiers under the new scheme is not enough and that inadequate training may degrade the army's combat effectiveness.
In an article published last month, Prakash wrote that the Agnipath scheme, in its present form, is suitable only for the army, whose large infantry is not excessively burdened with technology. In the case of the Navy and Air Force, he wrote, at least 5-6 years are required before a new entrant can acquire enough hands-on experience to be entrusted with the operation of lethal weapon systems and complex machinery and electronics. The former navy veteran suggested that this training period can be reduced to 3-4 years if forces get more intelligent and smarter people, but he added that the army needs to utilise the soldiers for a few more years once they are trained. "If you're getting more intelligent and smarter people into the services maybe you can reduce it (training) to three or four years. But then you must utilise once he's trained and proficient at his job. You must keep him in the service for a few more years to contribute to his unit. So I would say 7-8 maybe up to 10 years is perhaps more sensible than the present four years," he said in an interview with The Wire. "So you train him, make him proficient, enable him to become competent, and then use him for a few years and then let him go. You can still have the same benefits. You don't have to give him a pension. You'll still make savings." The Agnipath scheme was rolled out in June 2022. The youth selected under this scheme is called Agniveers, who are recruited for four years. After four years, 25 per cent of them will be retained and the rest 75 per cent will be let go. While the Centre maintains that the scheme had been designed to enable a youthful profile of the forces, the opposition and a section of people believe that this was done to save rising pension costs. The retired navy officer said that the Agnipath scheme, in its present form, degrades combat effectiveness, yet "we do need a scheme like this". "Because as has been mentioned continuously, the pay and pension are going up...so you do need a scheme which will reduce this expenditure. It could be a scheme like Agnipath but with major changes to it. It could be a very effective way of cutting down manpower, reducing expenditure, and yet enhancing combat capability."
The Indian Express recently reported that the government was considering increasing the years of service to 7 from the present 4, increasing the training period from the present 24 weeks to 42 weeks, and retaining up to 70 per cent rather than just 25 per cent. When asked whether these were sensible, Prakash said this was probably the right way to follow. "44 weeks is a good term for training."
Former Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhadauria, in a podcast with ANI's Smita Prakash, explained why the army settled for 4 years of service. He said many variations were discussed but it was felt that beyond 4 years, would be too late for the soldiers to go back and start a new career. "Anything beyond 5-7 years, if you have to send a person back to the field - it is bad for him. 4 years is just the right period when he can go back to society and have a second career. More than 4 years is too late for him to go to society for a second career."