Defence and diplomacy are often said to be opposite sides of the same coin: with the uniforms adding that they are often tasked with clearing up the mess created by incompetent foreign offices. Yet it has been a sterling feature of India’s democracy that unlike what obtains across its western border, a healthy distinction has been maintained between those two facets of governance.

Until now at least. General Bipin Rawat, not for the first time, has turned established norms on their head by contending that Pakistan and India could never enjoy a cordial relationship until Islamabad revokes its status as an Islamic state. There has never been a dearth of Pakistan-bashers in the country (the Navjot Singh Sidhu’s and Mani Shankar Aiyar’s are maverick exceptions) but not even the most Nagpur-oriented of them has never gone as far as the Chief of Staff of an Army that took immense pride in its secular, apolitical credentials.

Not that Pakistan is the only Islamic nation on the planet, are they all to be slammed as pariahs? Does India not have excellent ties many with of them, are remittances from Gulf-based NRIs not a critical component of India’s foreign-exchange reserves? Gen Rawat could undermine the several successes of the MEA in general, Mrs Sushma Swaraj in particular. Not to mention under-cutting the essays of Gen VK Singh. And in a larger context, are Hindu and Muslim intrinsically incompatible?

The “simple soldier” alibi will just not work: Rawat could not have been unaware of the developments over Kartarpur, who authorised him to “take on” Imran Khan? Worse, he stepped out of line at a function at which the focus was on young, impressionable, military cadets.

Was this not a case of nurturing an equivalent of the Hate-India campaign for which we consistently condemn Pakistan? What if other countries cite cow vigilantes running amuck, desecration of churches etc to question India’s secular status? Lambasting Pakistan for its sponsorship of terrorism in J&K is one thing, questioning that nation’s religious status is something else.

And if Sushma Swaraj is unable to ensure that the General refrains from exceeding his brief the MEA risks international embarrassment. Do his “brother generals” endorse his politically-loaded line? The efficiency of a military force is established by its showing in the field, even if the politicians seek to capitalise on surgical strikes etc.

The apex court’s latest order/observations on the Army’s use of excessive force in Manipur, and its rejection of the government’s argument serve as a stark reminder that in public perception the image of the Army is losing its aura. And it is the “strength” of public support that is the power behind every bullet the soldier fires. Loose talk, catering to a limited audience can ultimately prove enfeebling. Can the nation afford that? Nirmala Sitharaman has to answer the query.