The Spectacle of Strategy: The Rise of the "TV General" and the Erosion of Military Professionalism

The modern South Asian media landscape has birthed a new and controversial archetype: the "TV General." Defined by fiery rhetoric, performative patriotism, and a penchant for sensationalist claims, figures like retired Major General G.D. Bakshi have transformed military analysis from a sober academic exercise into a high-octane television spectacle. While these officers often frame their outbursts as a form of "information warfare" in defense of the motherland, a closer examination suggests that this trend represents a significant departure from traditional military values, inadvertently serving foreign propaganda and eroding the credibility of the very institutions they once served.

Historically, the Indian military took pride in its "silent professional" ethos - an apolitical, disciplined force that remained detached from the noise of public discourse. However, the rise of 24/7 news cycles in the last decade has created a demand for "infotainment." Retired officers, seeking relevance and revenue in their post-service years, have found a lucrative niche.

The primary conflict arises when the prestige of a military rank is used to validate unverified rumors. The recent viral claims regarding the alleged downing of two US F-35 fighters by Iran - a report eventually retracted even by Iranian state media as a "professional error" - were amplified by pundits like Gen. Bakshi. When a retired general peddles such misinformation, they are not merely expressing an opinion; they are spending the "credibility capital" of the entire armed forces. This commercialization of rank turns national security into a "pro-wrestling" format, where the "truth" is secondary to the "TRP" (Television Rating Point).

The "TV General" phenomenon often relies on a brand of military logic that falls apart under professional scrutiny. During Operation Sindoor in mid-2025, for example, Bakshi’s commentary was criticized by peers for its lack of strategic depth. He famously argued that India should have extended the conflict, ignoring the complexities of nuclear escalation control and the logistical strain of an open-ended war. By favoring a "theatrical pounding" over calculated restraint, such commentators prioritize public catharsis over the state's strategic stability.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this rhetoric is its unintended geopolitical consequences. Pundits with a heavy pro-Russian and anti-Western bias often find themselves acting as "mouthpieces" for foreign authoritarian regimes. In the context of the 2026 Iranian uprisings, Bakshi’s insistence on framing domestic dissent as a "CIA-led Color Revolution" aligns perfectly with the propaganda of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Furthermore, this "West vs. East" binary inadvertently serves Chinese interests. By discrediting Western technology and calling for the dismantling of partnerships like the Quad, these commentators undermine the very security architecture - supported by intelligence-sharing and advanced tech - that protects India from Chinese regional hegemony.

True patriotism in the military is defined by a commitment to the objective truth and the long-term safety of the nation. When retired officers succumb to the lure of the news studio, swapping "service before self" for "self-promotion," they risk transforming from respected veterans into caricatures of the profession. While the serving top brass remains disciplined and precise, the "TV War" continues to project an image of an undisciplined, jingoistic force to the world. To restore the sanctity of the uniform, the veteran community must rediscover the value of the "silent professional," ensuring that the rank they wear remains a symbol of trust, not a tool for a televised shouting match.