NEW DELHI — Protests have erupted in India over a new reform scheme to hire soldiers for a fixed term for the armed forces.

In the northern state of Bihar, protesters burned tyres and blocked key highways on Thursday, demanding a roll-back of the reforms. Police fired tear gas shells in some areas after clashes with protesters.

The "Agnipath" or Path of Fire program, which was unveiled on Tuesday, is aimed at applicants aged between 17.5 and 21. Successful candidates will join the armed services for four years, after which only 25% of them will be retained.

The move is aimed at cutting the army's expenditure on ballooning salaries and pensions — which consume more than half of its budget - and freeing up funds to modernise the forces. The government said this would also "enhance the youthful profile of the armed forces".

But potential recruits say the scheme does very little to create jobs and opportunities. Several of them shouted slogans like "give us jobs or have us killed" on Wednesday.

The programme has also received criticism from some military generals and defence experts who say it could weaken the structure of the army and could have serious ramifications for national security, especially when India has tense borders with two of its neighbours - Pakistan and China.

"It's a foolish move, one that could affect the efficiency of the security forces," says retired Major General Sheonan Singh.

"Saving money is good but it should not be done at the cost of defence forces. If you go to war with an experienced soldier, will a person with four years of training be able to replace him on his death? These things don't work like this."

India, which shares a heavily militarised border with Pakistan and has been involved in a tense stand-off with China along its Himalayan border, has one of the world's largest armed forces. With some 1.4 million personnel, it is also one of the country's top employers - with millions of people applying annually.

Every year, some 60,000 personnel retire and the army holds up to 100 fresh hiring "rallies" to replace them. But the hiring has been suspended for the past few years. Officials attribute it to the pandemic, but experts say the force was already stretched on resources and struggling to modernise.

Under Agnipath, 46,000 soldiers will be recruited this year.

The soldiers will go through training for six months and then will be deployed for three and a half years. During this period, they will get a monthly starting salary of 30,000 rupees ($384; £316), along with additional benefits which will go up to 40,000 rupees by the end of the four-year service.

One of the biggest concerns is the fate of the soldiers after they finish their initial term.

"I have been working very hard for the last two years to join the army. But suddenly the Agnipath scheme was announced," says 20-year-old Debojit Bora in the north-eastern state of Assam. "Now we will get a chance to work for only four years. So, even if I get selected, I will be retired from the job. What will I do after that?"

This is particularly alarming at a time when the country is facing a persistent job crisis. India's unemployment rate reached nearly 7.83% in April, according to the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE), an independent think tank. Millions of Indians lost their jobs when the pandemic struck India in 2020 when the country was already in the throes of a prolonged slowdown.

Besides, the unemployment rate among young people (aged 15-29) has been hovering over 20% for a long time, Mahesh Vyas, the managing director and CEO of CMIE, told The Indian Express.

The government has sought to allay these fears by announcing that the successful Agnipath applicants will be given priority in recruitment to central armed police forces and Assam Rifles (an Indian army unit).

But military experts are skeptical. They worry this would push young people into a life of frustration and with fewer job opportunities.

"Where will a 21-year-old 10th or 12th pass unemployed youth go for a job? If he goes for recruitment in the police, then he will be told that there are already several other fresh graduates in tow, so he should stand at the back of the line," says Maj Gen Singh.

Besides, four years is too short a time for the recruits to be able to adjust to military discipline, he adds.

"Six months out of four years will be spent in training. Then the soldier will go to areas like infantry and signals, for specialised training, which will take more time. It's not like they can become a pilot in the Air Force - they will become a groundsman or a mechanic. So, what will he learn in four years?"

Experts say a short-term contract also runs the risk of giving thousands of young unemployed people weapons training.

"Do you really want to put out so many people who are well trained in arms to look for jobs in a society where levels of violence are already so high?" Sushant Singh, a senior fellow with the Centre for Policy Research, a Delhi-based think tank, told the BBC in April.

Political scientist Pratap Bhanu Mehta, in a column in The Indian Express,says this could have "huge sociological implications, and if not handled well, we could be playing with fire".

Not everyone opposes the overhaul, though.

Retired Maj. Gen. SB Asthana said the step would benefit the army as it would help modernize India's forces.

"It is difficult to train old people in modern technology. But this generation is more capable. This plan will give freedom to the army to keep the best 25% of the soldiers and let the rest go."

Retired Lt. Gen. DS Hooda says it's wrong to expect an immediate change "in the organizational structure or ethos" of the army.

"If you look at the first four years [of the scheme], around 180,000 soldiers would be recruited under the scheme. This will give us a good idea as to how the scheme is working - what sorts of recruits are coming in, how are they getting integrated within the units - and then we review it," he adds.

In an earlier interview with the BBC, Lt. Gen. HS Panag said that India has a "large military where we are forced to use quantity to compensate for quality". As a developing economy, India's defence spending "cannot increase exponentially" and therefore it needed to slim the forces.

But Mehta argues that a shift from reliance on personnel to technology, and a younger age profile of soldiers "should be dealt with in its own terms, not governed just by the logic of cutting your pension bill".

"The armed forces need support and reform. But reforms should be governed by a sound sociological, professional, institutional and strategic logic... A dose of scepticism might be a better act of patriotism than cheerleading blindly, especially if you want reforms to succeed," he wrote. — BBC