Rudyard Kipling"
“When you're left wounded on Afganistan's plains and
the women come out to cut up what remains, Just roll to your rifle
and blow out your brains,
And go to your God like a soldier”
General Douglas MacArthur"
“We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction.”
“It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it.” “Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.
“The soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and be the deepest wounds and scars of war.”
“May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't .” “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.
“Nobody ever defended, there is only attack and attack and attack some more.
“It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.
The Soldier stood and faced God
Which must always come to pass
He hoped his shoes were shining
Just as bright as his brass
"Step forward you Soldier,
How shall I deal with you?
Have you always turned the other cheek?
To My Church have you been true?"
"No, Lord, I guess I ain't
Because those of us who carry guns
Can't always be a saint."
I've had to work on Sundays
And at times my talk was tough,
And sometimes I've been violent,
Because the world is awfully rough.
But, I never took a penny
That wasn't mine to keep.
Though I worked a lot of overtime
When the bills got just too steep,
The Soldier squared his shoulders and said
And I never passed a cry for help
Though at times I shook with fear,
And sometimes, God forgive me,
I've wept unmanly tears.
I know I don't deserve a place
Among the people here.
They never wanted me around
Except to calm their fears.
If you've a place for me here,
Lord, It needn't be so grand,
I never expected or had too much,
But if you don't, I'll understand."
There was silence all around the throne
Where the saints had often trod
As the Soldier waited quietly,
For the judgment of his God.
"Step forward now, you Soldier,
You've borne your burden well.
Walk peacefully on Heaven's streets,
You've done your time in Hell."
"Hey, sir, you don't want to die alone, do you ?" (Tak akan tuan mahu mati seorang ?)
Wednesday, November 11, 2026
Right most, me, a recruit at Recruit Training Center in Port Dickson all from Teluk Anson 1972
This passage is arguably one of the most powerful leadership episodes in Exigent Circumstances. It is much more than an account of a dangerous encounter with Somali militia during the World Food Programme mission. It captures something that military officers spend their entire careers trying to achieve: the unconditional trust of their soldiers.
The sentence that gives this passage its extraordinary emotional force is:
"Hey, sir, you don't want to die alone, do you?"
In Malay:
"Tak akan tuan mahu mati seorang?"
That young soldier's response is remarkable because it was spontaneous. It was not a rehearsed military response, an instruction from a superior or an attempt to impress an officer.
It was an expression of loyalty.
As UCIS Commander
And it changed the author's understanding of his relationship with his men.
1. The defining moment:
When loyalty becomes more valuable than rank
Consider the circumstances.
Major Swami had ordered his soldiers to remain inside their Condors. He intended to dismount alone and negotiate with the Somali militia.
He had assessed the situation, prepared his weapons and ammunition, established contingency arrangements and given clear instructions to his men.
He was prepared to confront approximately 15 armed Somalis at the barrier, with another 20 or so potentially armed individuals further behind.
He understood the danger.
Yet he was determined to undertake the negotiation himself, without unnecessarily exposing his soldiers.
Then something unexpected happened.
He heard movement behind him.
My Crew
Initially, he thought the Somalis were attempting to surround him and take him hostage. When he turned, he discovered that his own soldiers had dismounted and were moving into a fire-and-manoeuvre formation to support him.
He was furious.
He had given explicit instructions that nobody was to dismount.
But when he demanded an explanation, the youngest soldier answered:
"Hey, sir, you don't want to die alone, do you?"
This is the defining moment of the passage.
From inside K4 a hotspot commanded by Major Len Olivero
The soldier was not thinking about promotion, medals, personal recognition or career advancement.
He was thinking about his commander.
He was prepared to share the danger.
That is a remarkable expression of human solidarity.
2. The psychological transformation of the commander
The author describes experiencing goose bumps and feeling almost invincible.
Why?
Because something happened that no promotion examination, medal, appointment or increase in rank could provide.
He realised that his soldiers accepted him as their leader.
The A Team and us
This is an important distinction.
There are two kinds of authority in the military:
Formal authority Earned authority
Comes with rank Comes through conduct
Enforced through the chain of command
Sustained through trust
Requires obedience
Inspires commitment
Can be imposed
Must be earned
Exists because of appointment
Exists because soldiers believe in their commander
Major Swami suddenly recognised that he possessed something much more meaningful than formal authority.
He had earned the confidence of his men.
His statement that this experience was better than promotions is particularly revealing.
Bravo Company's Condors
For a career soldier, promotion is normally regarded as a major professional achievement.
Yet here was an experience that surpassed it.
He had discovered that the greatest reward of command is not how many men salute you, but how many would willingly stand beside you when the situation becomes dangerous.
3. Leadership is reciprocal:
The commander protects his soldiers, and soldiers protect their commander. This episode illustrates an important principle of military leadership.
Major Swami had spent time reminding his soldiers of their families back home.
Their wives, children, parents and siblings were waiting for them.
He reminded them of their responsibilities and the importance of returning home safely.
He also recognised the temptations and distractions surrounding them in Somalia.
The passage about the young Somali women is revealing in this respect.
Despite the difficult humanitarian circumstances, the author emphasised discipline, fidelity and responsibility to their families.
He was proud that the men of Bravo Company, commanded by Major Christopher Joseph, maintained their personal commitments despite the challenging environment.
This is leadership extending beyond tactical considerations.
He understood that soldiers are not simply weapons operators or manpower on a strength return.
They are husbands, fathers, sons and brothers.
They have lives beyond the battlefield.
And the commander has a responsibility to protect those lives.
The loyalty shown by the young soldier was, in many respects, a reflection of the relationship that had developed between the commander and his men. It was reciprocal.
He cared about them, and they cared about him.
4. The extraordinary significance of ethnic and religious diversity
One of the most important details in this passage is the author's description of his soldiers.
He identifies them as Malays, Chinese, Indians and Ibans.
He also explicitly mentions Muslims, Christians, Hindus and Buddhists.
This is not incidental.
It gives the episode a much deeper significance in the Malaysian context.
These men came from different ethnic, religious and cultural backgrounds.
Yet, when their commander's life appeared to be in danger, they did not hesitate to support him.
They did not first consider his religion, their religion or their ethnic differences.
They acted as soldiers belonging to the same formation.
This is a powerful demonstration of military camaraderie.
The young Malay soldier's words are particularly significant.
He did not say that a commander from another ethnic or religious background should fend for himself.
He effectively said: we are not going to leave you alone.
That is the essence of military brotherhood.
In that moment, they were not Malays, Chinese, Indians or Ibans. They were Rangers.
This is perhaps one of the most meaningful passages in the book when considering the question of national integration within the Malaysian Armed Forces.
It demonstrates what the military can achieve when common purpose, shared hardship and mutual respect transcend differences.
There is an important contrast here with the book's wider institutional criticism of discrimination and religious favouritism.
The soldiers demonstrated a standard of unity that every military institution should aspire to uphold. This incident deserves to be studied by young infantry section commanders.
6. Tactical aggression versus uncontrolled aggression
Another important aspect of the passage concerns the author's preparation before dismounting.
He describes checking his M4A1, M79, grenades, ammunition magazines, machete and protective ceramic plates.
He deliberately chose to wear his Ranger beret rather than his Kevlar helmet.
This description demonstrates his awareness of the danger and his intention to negotiate from a position of strength.
However, there is an important professional distinction worth making.
Military courage is not the same as recklessness.
The author was prepared to use force if attacked, but his immediate intention was to get the barriers removed without firing. That distinction matters. The successful outcome depended on several elements:
1. A clear understanding of the threat.
2. Preparation for possible armed resistance.
3. Communication with supporting elements.
4. A contingency plan.
5. A willingness to negotiate.
6. Sufficient restraint to avoid unnecessary bloodshed.
His soldiers provided the necessary security while he approached the militia. The episode therefore illustrates the relationship between deterrence, negotiation and controlled use of force.
The militia lowered their weapons, and eventually assisted in clearing the barriers.
The convoy continued towards Baidoa.
The important lesson is not that force should always be used to obtain compliance. It is that a credible, disciplined and coordinated force can sometimes prevent violence.
7. The greatest achievement
The loyalty of soldiers from different backgrounds
This is where I believe the passage becomes particularly significant.
The author was proud of Bravo Company.
He specifically identifies the different religious and ethnic backgrounds of his soldiers.
This deserves emphasis because it challenges the notion that loyalty in the Malaysian military must be determined by ethnic or religious affinity.
The young Malay soldier's response to his Indian commander is particularly moving.
He was prepared to share the danger with him.
That is the very opposite of discrimination.
It is an example of loyalty based on shared experiences, mutual respect and confidence in leadership.
There is also a broader institutional lesson.
If a Malaysian infantry formation can develop this degree of unity in the extremely difficult circumstances of Somalia, why should such unity not be cultivated throughout the Armed Forces?
The answer should be obvious.
An army's strength lies not merely in its weapons, equipment, organisation or numerical strength.
It also lies in the confidence its soldiers have in one another.
8. The paradox of leadership:
The commander gives orders, but sometimes his soldiers refuse to obey
There is an interesting contradiction in this incident.
Major Swami explicitly ordered his soldiers not to dismount.
They disobeyed him.
From a strictly disciplinary perspective, this was a breach of orders.
But from the perspective of human loyalty, their actions were extraordinary.
This raises an interesting question for military leadership education:
Was their action an example of indiscipline or an expression of exceptional loyalty?
My assessment is that it was both.
Their intentions were admirable, but disobeying a commander's tactical instructions in an armed confrontation can create additional danger, including confusion, crossfire and loss of control.
The commander had to manage that risk.
Nevertheless, the episode reveals something profound: the soldiers were not merely following an officer because regulations required them to.
They felt personally responsible for him.
That is an exceptionally strong bond.
A good commander should value such loyalty while ensuring that it operates within the discipline necessary to keep everyone alive.
9. The significance of Somalia in April 1994
The historical context makes the episode even more consequential.
This was April 1994, after the American withdrawal.
The security environment in Somalia remained volatile. Armed militia, competing interests, roadblocks and unpredictable encounters made movement outside protected areas dangerous.
The Malaysian contingent was operating in a difficult environment where tactical judgement and the ability to respond quickly were essential.
The World Food Programme mission also had a humanitarian purpose.
The convoy was not simply conducting a military exercise. It was operating in an environment where the delivery of humanitarian assistance could be disrupted by armed groups and local power structures.
This placed considerable responsibility on the officers and soldiers.
The author captures the tension between the humanitarian mission and the necessity of protecting the convoy.
That contrast is important: military professionalism requires the ability to exercise force when necessary without losing sight of the purpose of the mission.
10. Why this passage is among the most memorable in the book
I would identify four particularly powerful moments.
Moment 1 – The commander prepares to dismount alone
Courage and personal responsibility
He is prepared to face an armed group while ensuring that his soldiers remain protected.
Moment 2 – The soldiers disobey his orders
Loyalty and brotherhood
They refuse to allow their commander to face the danger alone.
Moment 3 – The young soldier's unforgettable question
Emotional connection
"Hey, sir, you don't want to die alone, do you?"
Moment 4 – The convoy continues to Baidoa
Collective achievement
The barriers are removed, the confrontation is resolved without an exchange of fire, and the soldiers continue their mission.
11. My overall reaction: This is what military brotherhood looks like
There are many things that can make an officer proud during a military career.
- Passing promotion examinations.
- Receiving decorations.
- Being appointed to prestigious commands.
- Successfully completing difficult courses.
- Being recognised by senior commanders.
But the incident on page 308 reveals something much more personal.
The author discovered that his soldiers genuinely accepted him.
That is an achievement that cannot be conferred through an appointment letter.
It cannot be awarded through a promotion board.
It cannot be purchased through influence.
It has to be earned.
I find his reflection that this experience was better than promotions particularly moving.
It tells us something about his priorities as a soldier and commander.
He valued the trust of his men above the conventional measurements of career success.
There is also an important qualification: this is the author's recollection of a particular incident, not independent proof of every aspect of the encounter. Its historical and operational significance would be strengthened by corroborating accounts from other participants.
Nevertheless, as a leadership narrative, its emotional force is unmistakable.
12. What young Malaysian infantry officers should take away
I would make this passage compulsory reading for discussion in an infantry leadership seminar.
Not because every officer should imitate the decision to dismount alone, but because every officer should understand what it takes to earn the confidence of his soldiers.
The discussion should centre on five questions:
1. Would your soldiers willingly stand beside you when your life is in danger?
2. Have you demonstrated sufficient concern for their welfare to earn their trust?
3. Do you lead through professional competence or merely through rank?
4. Can you recognise and develop initiative among your junior leaders?
5. Do your soldiers believe that you would risk your own safety to protect them?
These are uncomfortable questions, but they are necessary. A commander who expects loyalty must first demonstrate loyalty to his soldiers.
A commander who demands respect must first demonstrate respect.
And a commander who expects his soldiers to face danger must be prepared to share that danger.
My favourite lesson from this passage is simple: soldiers remember how their commanders treated them, especially when circumstances became dangerous.
Final verdict
One of the book's strongest leadership episodes
Page 308 is not simply another account of an armed confrontation in Somalia.
It is an account of the moment a commander discovered the true depth of his soldiers' loyalty.
The young Malay soldier's words are extraordinary because they transcend rank, religion, ethnicity and personal differences.
Major Swami was their commander. They were his soldiers. But in that moment, they were something more: brothers in arms.
And perhaps the most important distinction is this:
An officer may spend an entire career pursuing promotion, but the greatest achievement of his military life may be discovering that his soldiers would not leave him alone at the jaws of death.
That is something no promotion board can give him.
That is something he has to earn.
And that is why this particular episode in Exigent Circumstances deserves to be remembered.
One further observation: The passage also provides an interesting counterpoint to the book's wider criticism of discrimination and religious favouritism within the Malaysian Armed Forces.
The soldiers' conduct demonstrates the ideal of a genuinely integrated fighting force: professional loyalty and shared responsibility above ethnic and religious divisions. That contrast makes the episode particularly important to the book's larger message.
RM8.4m on flag pins will not make students patriotic By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Monday, November 09, 2026
Malaysiakini : “It is a popular delusion that the government wastes vast amounts of money through inefficiency and sloth. Enormous effort and elaborate planning are required to waste this much money.”
- P J O'Rourke (Parliament of Whores)
COMMENT | When questioned on why the government was spending millions of ringgit on flag pins for school students, Education Minister Fadhlina Sidek talked about nurturing patriotism, love of country and this being part of a holistic approach to some government scheme to make patriotic citizens.
Now this type of governmental thinking is not new. In 2013, former social affairs and cultural adviser to the government at the time, lamenting the fact that people were not keen on flag waving, said this: “The problem is the lack of such feelings among the people, especially those in urban areas.
“We also find students not imbued with love for the nation, which is symbolised by the national flag. The flag is the simplest and cheapest symbol, and for the cost of eight cigarettes, we can buy and wave the flag.”
I know folks are wondering why waste time on something like this. Why waste time on another government scheme to inculcate in students not any kind of critical thinking, but rather indoctrinating them into thinking that government and country are not mutually exclusive.
Veteran 1972 :
False vs. True Patriotism: Johnson was not condemning genuine love of one's country. Instead, he targeted insincere political figures and opportunists who used grand declarations of loyalty as a "cloak for self-interest," public deception, or a shield against criticism. [1, 2, 3]
Historical Background: The remark was made during intense political debates in Great Britain, directed in part at the rhetoric of figures like William Pitt the Elder and the "Patriot" political faction of the era. [1, 2, 3]
Historical Background: The remark was made during intense political debates in Great Britain, directed in part at the rhetoric of figures like William Pitt the Elder and the "Patriot" political faction of the era.
Meet the Priest Who Dared Challenge Muhammad—and Paved the Way for Today’s Critics. The man most responsible for making the once-unthinkable possible: openly challenging Islam before millions of Muslim viewers.
Long before it became fashionable to criticize Islam in the West, this Coptic priest was unearthing and airing its most embarrassing elements — from adult breastfeeding and drinking camel urine to sex slavery and Muhammad's now infamous encounter with al-Zutt.
His sources? Islam’s own Arabic texts.
His reward? Death threats, assassination fatwas, and a bounty on his head — but also eternal gratitude from millions of Muslim converts to Christianity.
Now in his 92nd year, Fr. Zakaria continues a mission whose enormous influence across the Arabic-speaking world remains largely unknown to Western audiences.
Don’t miss this rare opportunity to meet a living legend.
Still Believe the Peacefulls Will Survive Into the Next Century?
The demographic reality unfolding across Europe may be very different from what millions of people have been led to believe. For years, predictions about the future of Islam in Europe have fueled intense political debates.
In this in-depth documentary, Ignited Nations investigates the future of Islam in Europe — separating demographic facts from political narratives to uncover what the numbers really reveal.
From France and Germany to the United Kingdom and Sweden, we examine:
• The origins of the most widely repeated claims about Islam's future in Europe
• What the latest Muslim population statistics actually show
• Why Muslim population growth is slowing in some countries while continuing in others
• The demographic differences between first-generation and second-generation Muslims
• How migration policies since 2015 have reshaped Europe's population projections
• Why widely cited demographic forecasts depend on assumptions that may no longer hold
• What the next 20 years could realistically mean for Islam and Europe's changing religious landscape
Is Europe heading toward the demographic transformation many have predicted — or is the reality far more complicated?
This documentary examines the evidence, challenges conventional assumptions, and explores what the demographic trends could mean for Europe's future.
India Israel Alliance: Is This Pakistan’s Worst Nightmare? Operation Sindoor
Friday, November 06, 2026
Is India's growing partnership with Israel giving Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir sleepless nights? Iran's top security official has revealed a startling claim about Munir's reported warning over growing Hindu-Jewish ties, calling it a major threat to Pakistan and Muslims.
From Operation Sindoor to advanced Israeli drones, defence technology and intelligence cooperation, India's strategic partnership with Israel is reaching new heights. Is India's growing partnership with Israel giving Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir sleepless nights?
Is Pakistan worried about India's rising military power? What is behind Munir's latest remarks? Could this lead to another India Pakistan war or Operation Sindoor 2.0? The growing India Israel Relations have reached a new level following PM Modi's February 2026 visit to Israel, when both countries elevated their relationship to a Special Strategic Partnership.
Their cooperation spans advanced defence technology, intelligence sharing, military manufacturing and counter-terror operations. During Operation Sindoor in May 2025, the Indian Army and Indian Air Force deployed Israeli-origin Harpy Drones, SkyStriker Loitering Munitions and Heron Surveillance UAVs for precision strikes, reconnaissance and air defence.
Israel also openly supported India's right to self-defence following the Pahalgam Attack, which claimed the lives of 25 Hindu civilians. Against the backdrop of the India Pakistan Conflict, these developments have added another dimension to the regional balance of power.
The possibility of a wider India Pakistan War remains a major concern in regional Geopolitics. Meanwhile, Pakistan Defence Minister Khawaja Asif has acknowledged the military establishment's deep involvement in foreign policy and government decisions, highlighting Asim Munir's growing influence.
The outnumbered Swiss Guard, protectors of the Vatican, stood against an invading horde during the Sack of Rome in 1527, giving their lives so the Pope could make his escape. Read more about the Sack of Rome.
These forgotten moments are what make history fascinating. There were also the Swiss Guards at the Tuileries: On August 10, 1792, during the French Revolution, about 600 Swiss Guards died in a last stand defending the Tuileries Palace in Paris.
I am a Telugu, not many people realize that. Always have been. They are still Indians. For those uneducated peasants.
Much of the information that can be found on India’s ethnic and linguistic history focuses on the people of northern India. To an extent, this reflects a nationalist reading of Indian history, that sees the modern Indian state as the direct heir to a linear series of pan-Indian empires, most of which — Maurya, Gupta, Mughal — were centered around the Ganges plains of the north.
The history of southern India is much more obscure, but no less important. After all, the bulk of India’s maritime trade and cultural influence on the rest of Asia radiated out from southern India. And the influence was two-way: Europeans, Christians, Jews, and others first arrived in South India.
Partially, this historical bias is a reflection of the availability of sources, the interests of academics, and the fact that the historically and demographically most important languages of India (Sanskrit, Pali, Hindi, Urdu, Bengali) are all from the Ganges river valley, although there is some academic interest in Tamil, spoken in the southernmost part of India, because it is the Indian language with the longest continuous literary tradition.
The four major Dravidian groups of South India — Telugus (of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana), Tamils (of Tamil Nadu, and also of northern Sri Lanka), Kannadigas (of Karnataka), and Malayalis (of Kerala) — have interesting and dynamic histories. While the origins of the Dravidian peoples are obscure, recent linguistic and genetic research indicate that the Dravidian people and languages radiated across central and southern India about 4,500 years ago, and that their formation was probably linked with the arrival of Iranian farmers in the subcontinent, who mixed with indigenous hunter-gathers.
In particular, the influence of Telugus, also known as Andhras, on shaping the course of South Indian’s medieval and early modern history is particularly noteworthy. Nor is it insignificant, as Telugu is the largest South Indian language by speakers, and the fourth largest language in India today (my family is of Telugu origin).
No more USA, UK (colonial thieves - the evidence is in the British museum) and Europe. China will not be the new hegemon. That is the headline from Varanasi, where American economist Jeffrey Sachs urged Beijing to support India as the sixth permanent member of the UN Security Council.
Cooperation, not competition, between Asia’s two powers is the path to a multipolar world, he argued. Sachs also told India not to join the Quad, while predicting that by 2050 the US and Europe will hold only about 20% of the world economy and Asia nearly 50%. By 2100, three-quarters of humanity will live in Asia and Africa, and India will have twice China’s population.
He also calls today’s wars contests over hegemony. It is a bold, sweeping vision, and not everyone agrees with it. Is he right, or is this wishful thinking? We break down every claim, the data behind it, and the questions Delhi and Beijing must answer. Watch Jeffrey Sachs' full speech in Varanasi.
Exigent Circumstances: An institutional indictment of the Malaysian military establishment - The Minister Of Defence And All Generals Worth Their Salt Should Read This If They Want A World Class Military
Wednesday, November 04, 2026
UCIS Training
Why this is much more than a military autobiography
I would take the institutional critique of Exigent Circumstances by Major D Swami considerably further. In fact, I would argue that this is one of the book's most important contributions and potentially its most controversial aspect.
The book is not simply about an officer's military career, his experiences in jungle warfare, his deployment to Somalia or the people he encountered along the way. Beneath those experiences lies a much more difficult narrative: the relationship between an individual soldier and an institution that he believes did not always recognize, reward or treat its personnel equally.
The central tension is between the ideals of military service and the realities of institutional life.
A soldier is expected to demonstrate unquestioning commitment, discipline, courage, loyalty and sacrifice. But what happens when that soldier begins questioning whether the institution itself practices the values it demands from him?
What happens when professional competence appears to be less important than ethnic identity, religious affiliation, personal connections or institutional politics?
And what happens when an officer continues to serve despite believing that the organization has placed obstacles in his professional path?
These are not minor grievances. They concern the credibility, cohesion and long-term effectiveness of a national armed force.
I would examine the book through ten interconnected institutional issues.
1. The contradiction between national service and unequal belonging
One of the strongest themes is the contradiction between serving a multiracial country and experiencing an institution in which the author believes ethnic and religious identity can influence professional standing.
The Malaysian Armed Forces are a national institution. Their personnel are expected to defend every Malaysian, irrespective of race, religion or background.
The soldier does not defend only his own community. He defends the country.
Yet the author raises questions about whether non-Muslim personnel enjoy the same sense of institutional belonging and professional opportunity as their Muslim counterparts.
This is particularly significant for an officer who has invested years of his life in military service.
Consider the contradiction:
- He is considered sufficiently capable to command soldiers.
- He is expected to undertake dangerous operational assignments.
- He is required to observe military discipline and accept the chain of command.
- He is expected to demonstrate loyalty to the country.
- Yet he questions whether his professional opportunities are determined by the same standards applied to others.
This creates a sense of unequal belonging.
The issue is not whether one ethnic or religious community should be represented in the armed forces. It is whether every individual, irrespective of background, receives fair treatment.
The institutional question is whether the armed forces belong equally to all Malaysians who serve in them.
2. Religious identity and the danger of allowing religion into military command
This is among the most serious criticisms raised by the author's Somalia experiences.
The Somalia episode concerning the treatment of armed Somalis as saudara, or brothers, because of shared Muslim identity deserves particular scrutiny.
The significance goes beyond religious prejudice.
It raises a question about the integrity of the chain of command.
A military commander must make decisions according to:
- The operational situation.
- The safety of personnel.
- The rules of engagement.
- The mission's objectives.
- The available intelligence.
- The commander's professional judgement.
Religious affinity cannot replace these considerations.
If a soldier is expected to distinguish between hostile individuals according to religious identity rather than operational circumstances, the principle of impartial military command becomes compromised.
There is also a particularly troubling implication for non-Muslim personnel.
Would they have confidence that their lives were being protected with equal commitment?
Would they believe that operational decisions were being made impartially?
Would they feel that their commanding officers regarded their lives as equally important?
These questions go to the heart of military cohesion.
A soldier must know that his commander will protect him regardless of his religion or ethnicity.
A military organisation cannot afford two different standards of loyalty: one based on professional responsibility and another based on religious affinity.
This is why the Somalia account should be regarded as more than an isolated disagreement. It raises fundamental questions about professional military ethics.
3. Advancement and the importance of having the right connections
This is where the institutional critique becomes particularly personal.
In an earlier passage you shared, the author describes his career as seemingly going nowhere and refers to not having godfathers in high places.
That is a revealing expression.
It suggests that the author perceived career progression as involving more than professional ability, operational experience and dedication.
The phrase raises the issue of patronage.
In a properly functioning military organisation, promotion should be supported by demonstrable criteria, including:
- Professional qualifications.
- Command performance.
- Operational experience.
- Leadership ability.
- Discipline and integrity.
- Potential to assume greater responsibilities.
However, the author suggests that personal connections and institutional networks can become important determinants of advancement.
This raises a serious question: what happens to an officer who does not have access to influential patrons?
He may work harder, undertake difficult assignments, acquire operational experience and demonstrate commitment, but still feel that his prospects are restricted.
This is especially damaging when the officer believes that other considerations, including ethnicity and religious affiliation, carry greater weight.
The cost of career stagnation
Career stagnation has consequences beyond missing a promotion.
It can affect:
- An officer's confidence in the organisation.
- His willingness to invest further in professional development.
- His perception of whether his contributions matter.
- His ability to influence military policy and command decisions.
- His eventual assessment of the institution to which he dedicated his working life.
There is also a particularly important distinction between being unsuccessful and being unfairly disadvantaged.
An officer who is passed over for promotion may accept the decision if the process is fair and transparent.
An officer who believes the system is biased may experience something very different: a loss of confidence in the institution itself.
The author's reference to godfathers is therefore more than an expression of disappointment. It introduces the question of whether professional advancement is genuinely meritocratic.
An army that fails to recognise talent risks losing the very people it should be developing for senior leadership.
4. The politics of recognition:
Who receives credit and who gets overlooked?
One of the less obvious aspects of institutional discrimination is the distribution of recognition.
Military institutions are hierarchical. Recognition comes through promotions, appointments, decorations, commendations, prestigious courses and access to important responsibilities.
These are not merely symbols of prestige. They determine who gets opportunities to develop and who becomes visible to senior decision-makers.
The academic discussion of Exigent Circumstances highlights the author's concerns about the relationship between sacrifice, recognition and institutional politics. This raises a further question.
Does an officer's contribution receive the same recognition regardless of his background?
For example, two officers may have undertaken equally difficult operational assignments. Both may have demonstrated courage and professional competence. Yet if their subsequent recognition differs, the organization must be able to explain why.
A transparent system should be able to defend its decisions.
This is particularly important in the armed forces because recognition establishes institutional memory.
The officers who receive recognition become examples for younger generations. Their careers are used to demonstrate what the organization values.
If the recognition system is perceived to be biased, the message received by younger officers is damaging.
They may conclude that hard work alone is insufficient.
That is how institutional cynicism develops.
5. Regimental pride, elitism and the danger of institutional tribalism
An interesting example comes from another passage you shared about the 7th Rangers.
The author describes the regiment's strong sense of identity and its belief that it was the best fighting body in the army. There was also a certain contempt for other corps.
This is an interesting subject because it reveals that institutional divisions are not necessarily confined to ethnicity or religion.
They can also develop around regimental identity, professional specialisation and military traditions.
Regimental pride is not inherently negative.
Indeed, it can be a powerful source of cohesion. Soldiers who identify strongly with their regiment may develop exceptional loyalty, discipline and fighting spirit.
But there is a difference between pride and superiority.
When regimental pride becomes contempt for other formations, it can undermine cooperation.
When ethnic or religious identity becomes another source of division, the problem becomes even more serious.
The author is therefore dealing with several overlapping forms of institutional identity:
- Ethnic identity.
- Religious identity.
- Regimental identity.
- Professional identity.
- Rank and seniority.
These identities can strengthen an organization when they complement one another. They can weaken it when they compete for dominance.
The ideal is a professional military culture in which soldiers can take pride in their individual backgrounds and regiments without questioning the equal standing of others.
6. The difference between a good officer and a good military institution
I would regard this as one of the most valuable leadership lessons in the book.
Lt Col Zulkapli on the left with the 4th Brigade Commander
He was described as an officer who believed in training, cared for his men and possessed the necessary mechanised infantry experience to transform a conventional battalion.
He represents a professional standard that transcends ethnicity and religion.
But there is a deeper institutional point here.
An organisation may have excellent individual officers and still have serious institutional shortcomings.
This distinction matters.
A good commander can create a positive environment for his men, even when the wider organisation has weaknesses.
A good commander can encourage professional excellence, even when promotion systems are perceived to be imperfect.
A good commander can earn the respect of his soldiers, even when the institution struggles to maintain their confidence.
The danger is that an institution becomes dependent on exceptional individuals rather than establishing systems that consistently produce good leadership.
That is not sustainable.
The armed forces should not depend on the occasional outstanding commander to compensate for weaknesses in its professional culture.
It should create an environment in which fairness, competence and accountability are institutional expectations.
What the book teaches about command
The contrast between Zulkapli and the less satisfactory leadership experiences described in the memoir provides a useful framework for evaluating military officers.
Good military leadership - Poor institutional leadership
Values competence -Values connections or personal loyalties
Develops subordinates -Protects personal position
Takes responsibility -Shifts blame
Makes impartial decisions -Allows prejudice to influence judgement
Protects soldiers -Treats personnel as expendable
Recognises merit -Allows recognition to become political
This is not merely a question of personality.
It is about the kind of professional culture an army should cultivate.
7. The experience of non-Malay soldiers:
A question of dignity and equality
The book's institutional critique should not be restricted to commissioned officers.
The experience of non-Malay soldiers is equally important.
The Malaysian military is made up of personnel from different ethnic and religious communities.
They undertake the same basic responsibilities and are exposed to the same operational dangers.
A soldier serving in the jungle does not become less courageous because he is Chinese, Indian, Iban, Kadazan or Malay.
Nor should his contribution become less valuable because of his religious background.
This is particularly important when considering Dayak soldiers and other indigenous personnel.
The question is whether their professional contributions, career opportunities and dignity are consistently recognised.
There is a broader issue here concerning the relationship between the armed forces and the Malaysian national identity.
If soldiers from different communities fight alongside one another, share hardships and accept the same risks, the institution should reinforce that common identity.
It should not reproduce divisions that undermine it.
The ultimate test of military equality is not what an organisation says about diversity. It is how it treats its personnel when decisions about responsibility, advancement, recognition and protection have to be made.
8. The treatment of junior officers and the responsibility of senior commanders
The experiences involving 2nd Lieutenant Othman Bahadon in Somalia provide another important dimension.
You previously shared the Chapter 56 passage in which Othman, newly commissioned from the Royal Military College, expresses anxiety about going to Somalia because he has not completed his Young Officers Tactics Course.
This is an interesting leadership episode.
It illustrates the relationship between experience and responsibility.
A young officer entering an operational environment needs guidance, encouragement and competent supervision. He must be allowed to learn, but he must not be abandoned to learn through avoidable mistakes.
There are two sides to this:
The responsibility of the junior officer: To prepare himself, overcome apprehension and develop the confidence necessary to command.
The responsibility of senior officers: To provide mentorship, supervision and the professional support that young commanders require.
This is especially relevant to the institutional critique because a military organisation must develop its future leaders systematically.
If advancement becomes more important than mentorship, or personal ambition takes precedence over professional development, the institution eventually suffers.
Your account of Ivan Lee's reassurance also provides a useful contrast: good military leadership is not necessarily about giving orders. Sometimes it is about instilling confidence in someone who is about to face an extraordinary challenge.
9. The institutional consequences of discrimination
The author's concerns should also be considered from the perspective of military effectiveness.
Discrimination is not merely a question of fairness or individual dignity. It can have serious operational consequences.
Consider the possible chain of events:
Perceived ethnic or religious favouritism
Loss of confidence in promotion and appointments
Frustration and professional alienation
Reduced institutional trust and cohesion
Potential damage to operational effectiveness
This is not an inevitable outcome in every case, but it is a recognised institutional risk.
A soldier must have confidence in his comrades and commanders.
He must believe that decisions are made professionally and that his contribution matters.
If that confidence disappears, the organisation may retain its formal hierarchy while losing some of the trust that makes the hierarchy effective.
The Somalia experience makes this particularly relevant because military cohesion is not an abstract concept when soldiers are operating under fire.
10. The NEP and the wider Malaysian institutional environment
The author's criticism also needs to be understood within Malaysia's wider political and administrative environment.
The New Economic Policy, introduced in 1971, fundamentally shaped the country's approach to economic restructuring and the correction of socioeconomic inequalities.
However, debates about the implementation and extension of preferential policies have also raised questions about meritocracy, equal opportunity and the treatment of non-Bumiputera citizens.
The institutional critique in Exigent Circumstances brings these wider national debates into the military environment.
The important question is not whether socioeconomic inequalities should be addressed.
It is whether the application of policies and institutional practices can create lasting disadvantages for individuals who have demonstrated professional competence and commitment.
The military presents a particularly sensitive case because it is supposed to be a unifying national institution.
Its personnel should be able to believe that their contributions are judged fairly.
If an officer comes to believe that his ethnicity is a disadvantage, the consequences extend beyond his personal career.
It can affect his perception of national belonging.
It can affect his relationship with the institution.
And it can affect his willingness to believe in the promises of equal citizenship.
This is where the memoir moves from military sociology into a wider discussion about Malaysian society.
11. The author's greatest institutional dilemma: Why continue serving?
This is, in my view, the emotional centre of the institutional critique.
The author describes a military career that involved considerable personal commitment, difficult assignments, operational dangers and professional disappointments.
His career was not an easy progression from recruit to commissioned officer.
He had to overcome challenges, establish his professional credibility and prove himself in demanding circumstances.
The reference to his career going nowhere and his lack of godfathers in high places is especially revealing.
Yet he continued.
He served in the jungle. He commanded men. He went to Somalia. He accepted operational responsibilities.
This raises an interesting question:
Why would someone continue giving so much to an institution that he believes has not always treated him fairly?
I think the answer lies in the distinction between the country and its institutions.
The author appears to have remained committed to the former even when he became disillusioned with the latter.
This is a significant distinction.
He could criticise the military establishment without rejecting the country.
He could question discriminatory practices without abandoning his fellow soldiers.
He could expose institutional shortcomings without denying the value of military service.
That is a much more complicated position than simple resentment.
It is also what gives the memoir its emotional weight.
12. What the Malaysian Armed Forces should learn from this book
If the institutional criticism is taken seriously, it has practical implications.
I would identify seven areas requiring attention.
Area - Institutional improvement
Recruitment - Ensure equal professional opportunities
Training - Provide equitable access to specialised courses
Promotion - Make criteria transparent and auditable
Appointments - Base selection on competence and operational suitability
Command Maintain religious and ethnic impartiality
Accountability - Provide credible mechanisms for investigating discrimination
These are not radical demands.
They are basic requirements of a professional military organization.
Indeed, the more dangerous the institution's responsibilities, the more important these principles become.
An army cannot afford to waste capable officers because of prejudice, patronage or narrow identity considerations.
It needs the best people available, wherever they come from.
13. A critical assessment: Is the author's argument entirely beyond question?
A serious examination of the book should also consider its limitations.
I would not weaken the author's argument by pretending that every allegation is automatically established fact.
There are three important distinctions.
First: Personal experience.
What the author personally witnessed, experienced or was told is valuable testimony.
Second: Institutional interpretation.
His conclusion that certain experiences reflected racial or religious discrimination is an interpretation that deserves serious consideration.
Third: Systemic proof.
Establishing that discrimination was widespread or embedded in formal promotion policy would require further evidence, including promotion records, appointment criteria, comparative career histories and testimony from other personnel.
This distinction is important because it makes the critique stronger, not weaker.
A book that raises uncomfortable institutional questions should invite examination rather than demand unquestioning acceptance.
The author's account is particularly valuable because it provides a starting point for a wider investigation into the experiences of minority personnel in the Malaysian military.
The academic discussion of the memoir also identifies subjectivity and the need for independent corroboration as limitations, while recognising its value as first-person military testimony.
14. The ultimate significance: A soldier's challenge to the institution he served
I would go further and suggest that the book has two distinct narratives.
The first is the military narrative.
It is the story of a young man entering the army, undergoing training, becoming an officer, participating in jungle operations, commanding soldiers and serving in Somalia.
It is a story of adventure, danger, leadership, comradeship and survival.
The second is the institutional narrative.
It is the story of a man who believes that his professional journey was complicated by ethnic and religious divisions, perceived discriminatory practices, career obstacles and a system that did not always recognise his contributions.
The two narratives are inseparable.
Without the military experiences, the institutional criticism might appear to be merely a personal grievance.
But because the author describes his operational responsibilities, his relationships with soldiers, his experiences in Somalia and his professional journey, the criticism is placed within the context of a life of service.
That is what makes the book interesting.
It is not written by an outside observer who has never experienced military life. It is written by someone who spent 26 years within the organization.
His perspective is therefore that of an insider who is willing to question the institution.
15. My strongest overall judgement
I would describe Exigent Circumstances as an uncompromising examination of the relationship between military service, institutional discrimination and national identity.
Its most important contribution is that it challenges the comfortable assumption that a national institution necessarily treats all its members equally.
It asks whether the ideals of meritocracy, brotherhood, discipline and national unity are consistently reflected in actual institutional practices.
It also exposes a contradiction that deserves serious attention:
A soldier may be expected to risk his life for every Malaysian, yet he may feel that his own identity prevents him from enjoying equal professional recognition.
That contradiction is difficult to ignore.
The book's treatment of leadership adds another dimension.
It demonstrates, through examples such as Lieutenant Colonel Zulkapli Abdul Rahman and Captain Ivan Lee, that professional excellence, concern for soldiers and competent command are qualities that transcend race and religion.
Its criticism of patronage and career advancement raises questions about whether the military always develops and promotes the people best equipped to lead.
And its Somalia experiences give these issues an operational and human dimension that makes them particularly serious.
I would therefore argue that the book is not simply a military memoir containing criticism of the armed forces. Its institutional critique is central to its identity as a work.
The battlefield is only one setting in which the author fought his battles.
The other was within the organization to which he had devoted his professional life.
And the most provocative message is this:
Loyal to the flag. Unafraid to challenge the fabric.
A soldier's duty is to defend his country. But that duty does not require him to remain silent when he believes the institutions of that country have failed to uphold the principles they profess.
A professional military must recognize courage, competence and sacrifice without first asking about the soldier's ethnicity or religion.
It must reward merit, not patronage. It must value leadership, not merely rank. And it must protect every soldier with equal commitment.
The strength of an army is not measured only by its ability to defeat an enemy. It is also measured by the fairness, integrity and unity of the institution that commands it.
That, in my assessment, is the deeper argument of Exigent Circumstances.
It is a challenge not only to the Malaysian military establishment, but also to the wider Malaysian understanding of patriotism, equality and belonging.
The book deserves to be discussed in military academies, leadership courses and institutions concerned with national security and public administration.
It should provoke debate, including disagreement. But it should not be dismissed merely because its subject matter is uncomfortable.
A military institution confident in its professionalism should be willing to examine uncomfortable testimony. Its response should be to demonstrate fairness, not to demand silence.
And that is perhaps the most enduring legacy the author hopes to leave behind.
My reaction: A wonderful combination of military leadership, soldierly camaraderie, mischief and operational professionalism.
This is one of the more entertaining chapters in Exigent Circumstances.
What makes it particularly interesting is that it reveals another dimension of military life that is often missing from conventional military autobiographies: the humour, practical jokes, competitive spirit and personal relationships that develop between officers in the field.
But beneath the humour, there are several important aspects worth examining.
1. Lieutenant Colonel Zulkapli Abdul Rahman – The officer every soldier would want
The opening description is significant. You describe him as an awesome officer, a gem, someone who believed in training and loved his men.
That is a powerful endorsement.
What makes this passage effective is that you do not simply praise him through adjectives. You demonstrate his personality through his actions. He was introducing a major transformation, converting a conventional infantry battalion into a mechanised infantry battalion. This required professional knowledge, preparation, discipline and a willingness to challenge established practices.
His observation about American lights discipline is revealing. He wanted his Malaysian officers and soldiers to measure themselves against a higher standard.
He was demanding, but apparently approachable. That distinction is important in military leadership.
2. The American lights discipline incident – Military humour at its best Your response to the CO's criticism is absolutely hilarious.
Rather than argue with him or defend Malaysian soldiers, you and Bhaji decided to demonstrate that the Americans were not necessarily superior in every respect.
The invented story about cobras and king cobras hiding beneath dried oil-palm leaves is wonderfully mischievous.
What makes the episode work is the progression:
- The Americans initially settle down confidently.
- You introduce an imaginary threat.
- The information spreads throughout their positions.
- Torches begin appearing everywhere.
- Their carefully maintained lights discipline disappears.
- Bhaji proudly reports the result to the CO.
And then comes the best part:
"What did you two clowns do?"
That single sentence tells the reader something about Lieutenant Colonel Zulkapli. He knew his officers well enough to suspect immediately that something was going on.
There is also an interesting contrast here. The CO was trying to instill professional standards, while his two officers were busy conducting their own unofficial psychological operation against the Americans.
It is a delightful episode because it shows that soldiers can be serious about their profession without taking themselves too seriously.
3. Bhaji's swamp operation – A brilliant practical joke
This is arguably even better than the snake incident.
Bhaji discovers the Americans marking their routes and assault direction. Instead of simply observing, he decides to interfere.
The result is a battalion assault through waist-deep swamp in darkness.
The description of the Americans and Malaysians cursing their way through the swamp is wonderfully visual.
There is an important literary quality here: you allow the reader to discover what happened through the consequences rather than explaining the joke beforehand.
The suspicious look from Lieutenant Colonel Zulkapli is particularly effective. He is beginning to recognise a pattern.
And then comes the breakfast scene.
Bhaji asking whether you have sent breakfast to your mortar platoon is a wonderfully understated moment. You realise that his question is suspicious because he is the 2IC of A Company, not your mortar platoon commander.
Your internal observation that the CO might have laughed or the two of you might have ended up in a world of trouble adds another layer of humour.
These are the sorts of incidents that make military memoirs memorable. They capture the informal relationships and unspoken understandings between officers.
4. The chapter is not merely about practical jokes
There is a more substantial military story developing underneath the humour. Look at the range of activities:
- Exercise Kilat Strike with American forces from Okinawa.
- Mechanised infantry development.
- Battalion-level assault exercises.
- A company deployed to Cambodia on peacekeeping duties.
- Soldiers preparing for winter warfare in Turkey.
- Anticipated deployment to Bosnia.
- Your selection for the Squadron Leader's Course at the Armour School.
This is a battalion undergoing professional development and expanding its operational capabilities.
The narrative also demonstrates how Malaysian Army personnel were increasingly exposed to multinational exercises, peacekeeping commitments and mechanised warfare.
That gives the chapter historical and institutional significance beyond the entertaining anecdotes.
5. Your Squadron Leader's Course and the mechanised experience
This is an important transition in your military career.
Being selected for the Squadron Leader's Course indicates that your superiors recognised your potential and wanted you to develop professionally in mechanised operations.
The acquisition of B, D, E and H driving licences is another interesting detail.
But what particularly catches my attention is your reference to learning under Corporal Salim bin Othman, Zaid bin Salleh and Lance Corporal Shamsuddin bin Salleh.
It subtly acknowledges something important about military organisations: officers may hold command appointments, but much of their practical competence is developed through the experience and expertise of their NCOs and soldiers.
Your final reference to Somalia is also significant. Training in a combat environment, where mistakes could have serious consequences, gives the passage a different weight.
The earlier humour gives way to a reminder that operational competence is not a game.
Literary assessment: What makes this chapter stand out?
I see three distinct qualities.
First, the human dimension. You portray officers as real people rather than cardboard military figures. They have personalities, weaknesses, humour, friendships and eccentricities.
Second, the leadership dimension. Lieutenant Colonel Zulkapli emerges as a respected commanding officer. You communicate your admiration without turning the chapter into an exaggerated tribute.
Third, the storytelling. The two practical jokes are told with excellent timing. The reader is allowed to enjoy the incidents without being burdened with unnecessary explanations.
There is also something refreshing about the relationship between you and Bhaji.
It reflects the camaraderie that develops between officers who understand one another and are comfortable enough to engage in mischief.
A few editorial improvements. Before publication, I would recommend:
1. Remove the duplicated paragraphs describing Exercise Kilat Strike and the snake incident. (Already printed)
2. Clarify whether the American forces were conducting the exercise alongside the Royal Malay Regiment or operating under a combined command.
3. Explain briefly what the Squadron Leader's Course qualified you to do in the mechanised infantry environment.
4. Retain the conversational language. Expressions such as "two clowns", "shit show" and "world of shit" contribute to the authenticity of the narrative.
5. Give the final Somalia reference a little more detail if the next section develops your mechanised training experience there.
My overall verdict
This chapter is important because it demonstrates that Exigent Circumstances is not simply a chronicle of military operations, hardship, discrimination, career obstacles and combat experiences.
It is also a story about people.
Lieutenant Colonel Zulkapli Abdul Rahman comes across as an officer who earned the affection and respect of his men. Bhaji emerges as a mischievous but resourceful colleague. And you portray yourself as an officer who could take military training seriously while enjoying the lighter side of soldiering.
Perhaps the greatest strength of this chapter is that it allows the reader to laugh with the soldiers before reminding them that these same soldiers would eventually face considerably more dangerous circumstances.
That contrast is valuable.
It also reinforces what makes D Swami's memoir unusual: the willingness to record not only the difficult and controversial aspects of military life but also the ridiculous, amusing and deeply human experiences that conventional military histories frequently leave out.
I would preserve both practical-joke episodes. They give this chapter personality, warmth and considerable entertainment value.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/04/53316359bc517932cc9b4f1e696f2b27.jpg)
