Indian Defence Review

The monkey has bitten Theatre Commands again and is enjoying the catfight. The game has been ongoing for decades; monkey being the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and cats the three Services – or rather the Chiefs. The monkey is adept at throwing a carrot at the cats to create dissent, carrot being representational because carrots are preferred by rabbits not cats. Bulk of the Indian Civil Service (ICS) who stayed back at the time of Independence were absorbed in MoD, converting to IAS, but retaining traits of ICS; divide and rule and treat Armed Forces with a vengeance. This facilitated the monkey to continue the game of kho-kho within the MoD – keep passing the buck with none accountable. The Service HQ anyway are ‘attached offices’, so let them survive on whatever is dished out and they alone are responsible for their organizations – buck stops with the cats. Monkey anyway is superior breed since it can outpace the cats.  

The media is agog with news of Admiral Sunil Lanba, Naval Chief and Chairman, Chiefs of Staff Committee (COSC), saying, “The three services are not in agreement on theatre commands. The IAF is not in agreement.” During his press briefing before the Navy Day on December 4, Admiral Lanba said, “There’s a need for an operational commander to look after the theatres… The three service chiefs cannot be theatre commanders. We need one operational commander. You can call him permanent chairman, COSC or the chief of defence staff. We first need an HDO (Higher Defence Organization) before we can think of theatre commands.”

Media report further states that IAF spokesperson has not responded to what Admiral Lanba has mentioned about IAF not agreeing to Theatre Commands. But media has talked of the Director General, Centre for Air Power Studies (CAPS) saying that the IAF would lose its flexibility if it was confined to a theatre. DG CAPS was quoting as saying, “The IAF can operate from anywhere, given the range and capabilities of its assets. Exercise Gagan Shakti, conducted by the IAF earlier this year, proved that fighters could take off from a base in the east, ‘strike targets’ in the Arabian Sea and land at bases in the south.” Media construes that as DG CAPS rejecting theatreisation.

There are a number of issues involved here. The monkey is skilled in throwing red herrings and controls the media to fair extent, if not totally for defence issues, as confirmed through thousands of past instances. A word inserted, removed here and there makes all the difference. If the IAF spokesperson refused to comment on Admiral Lanba’s statement, it could also be because the Air Chief, like his naval counterpart first wants a HDO and then follow it up with Theatre Commands, not that this could be the only reason.

As for the statement by DG CAPS, it is not clear in what context he was speaking, but most certainly he did not imply that assets of one theatre cannot or would not be employed elsewhere. That flexibility has been exercised in the past including in previous wars and in IPKF operations with even naval air assets supporting ground operations on land, and will continue to be so exercised in future also. In the case of Theatre Commands, that flexibility will be exercised by the head of the empowered HDO. If that were not the case then even a country like China will be ill prepared to fight on multiple fronts, having implemented Theatre Commands.

Though Admiral Lanba has confined himself in talking of “need for an operational commander to look after the theatres”, there remains the vital need to reorganize the MoD, which the monkey is most afraid of. An operational commander presided over by the monkey will make it most difficult to streamline the rot that has been allowed to be set in over the decades in defence matters. That is why HQ Integrated Defence Staff (IDS) which was raised during UPA I rule with the explicit purpose of being part of MoD was kept separate, and the driving force behind HQ IDS, the then defence minister was forced to step down on purported charges of ‘Coffingate’, of which he was absolved of years later.

The monkey has been most concerned about operational powers of the CDS, if established. That is why, the CCS note based on which HQ IDS was established also reads that as and when the CDS is established’, he will have equal voting powers as Service Chiefs, and if two Chiefs disagree then arbitration will be done by MoD; implying monkey will comfortably continue to divide and rule. Establishment of the CDS recommended on priority by the Kargil Review Committee and endorsed by the Group of Ministers (GoM) headed by the then Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister under UPA I was kept in suspended animation, till the Naresh Chandra Committee was told to dilute the term to Permanent Chairman COSC.

During the tenure of Manohar Parrikar as Defence Minister, he went on record to publicly state in December 2015 that the CDS will be a reality soon. But a decade earlier, on September 8, 2005, Defence Minister (later President) Pranab Mukherjee too had told a tri-service audience government had even decided who the CDS would be, adding that though there wasn’t complete consensus on the issue, every decision doesn’t require total consensus. As for Theatre Commands, HQ IDS had ordered five studies in 2005-2006 which were presented to the DGMO and equivalent in Navy and Air Force, with recommendation for Integrated Theatre Commands, Integrated Functional Commands, Joint Commands for space, cyber, special operations, logistics, training etc – including which should be Bi-Service or Tri-Service. All were in agreement that the existing 17 Commands should be so reorganized in interest of optimization of resources and combat power.     

There may be an odd Service Chief that may resist the CDS and Theatre Commands perceiving ‘loss of power’ for himself, even doing so n behest of the monkey, But should he not be roughshod into submission in national interests. Ironically, the monkey holds its master (s) captive and neither wants the CDS, nor Theatre Commands. Therefore, periodic excuses that there is no consensus amongst Chiefs for appointing a CDS. The carrot is also used effectively as a spanner. In the abovementioned meeting on September 8, 2005 a Service Chief was vehement we must have a CDS with full operational powers, answering Pranab Mukherjje’s question to the Chiefs. But a few months later just before retiring the same Chief came out with a statement that we should go for a CDS only after our internal security problems are resolved. Whether this was because of the monkey’s carrot and whether this contributed to his being positioned as a Governor within 10 days of his retirement notwithstanding, but former President Pranab Mukherjee just mentioned last month that bureaucracy is the biggest hurdle in the nation’s development.

So where do we go from here? The proposal for appointing a Permanent Chairman of COSC is or reportedly has been sent to the CCS. In all probability, this Permanent Chairman will not be given additional operational powers, other than the existing responsibility of overseeing out of area contingencies. HQ IDS will not be merged with MoD. Without operational control of Theatre Commands given to Permanent Chairman COSC, any move for theatreisation would imply placing these formations under the NSA; a move not desirable but very much possible if the same dispensation continues after the next elections. Such  arrangement may conveniently be termed ‘temporary’ while the tussle to grant full operational powers to Permanent Chairman COSC prolongs another few years, with the monkey acquires the stature of a King-Kong baboon. 

What India needs is early establishment of a CDS and concurrent theatreisation, but that does not appear to be our destiny. It certainly will make our adversaries increasingly happy and prompt them to feed the omnivore monkey its favourite fare of nuts, fruits, seeds, flowers, even meat in the form of bird’s eggs, small lizards, insects and spiders.