Military & Aerospace

China: LAC impasse and Army-ITBP spat
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
Issue Net Edition | Date : 03 May , 2014

First the facts

– Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) has five battalions deployed in Eastern Ladakh including those on the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

ITBP does not have its own integral intelligence setup so essential in an operational situation.

– The DIG Headquarter controlling these forces is located at Srinagar, 258 air km and 418 road km from Leh. Zoji La, on the Himalayan Range, and located on the main highway from Srinagar to Leh,  is closed to road traffic from November to end May.

– Considering the separation of the Headquarter from the units, an adhoc Headquarter is functional under the Deputy at Leh – a compromise solution at best, considering the division of resources.

– ITBP communications are based, primarily, on High Frequency radio, which is most vulnerable to interception and being jammed when required particularly in an operational situation.

– The role of ITBP amplifies the tasks of the Force as –  to guard the Northern borders and prevent violations and encroachments, prevent smuggling, unauthorized movement of goods, weapons, personnel and such like non-traditional threats in the border areas.

– ITBP does not have its own integral intelligence setup so essential in an operational situation.

– Thus the orientation of the force is essentially towards “policing” tasks.

The Ground Realties. 

– The Army has Infantry and Mechanized forces suitably located with robust combat support and controlling headquarters well forward and within easy reach of the LAC.

The Chinese Border Defence Units deployed and garrisoned along the entire LAC are directly under the PLA, which is surely not mere “policing” duties.

– India’s perception of the LAC is undemarcated on ground but has been identified along suitable geographical and relief features.

– India and China have unilaterally delineated the LAC on their respective maps but have not shared the same with each other. As a result, each assumes the others perception from the activities that both carry out to dominate upto their respective perceptions.

– Consequently, common areas claimed by both arise, and are contested for by the militaries. Often termed,inappropriately, as “no-mans land”.  India generally terms it as “no-mans land” which is not paid heed to by China, thus putting India at a disadvantage. India should modify term to “Both-mans Land”, so that India does not restrain its troops from operating in that area.

– Very evidently, the LAC is a “LIVE” boundary, and should be manned accordingly. The PLA platoon strength that camped in Depsang was no group of local herdsmen or Yak smugglers or in any way could be construed as non-traditional threat. Therefore if required more than a “Police “ force response.

– The Chinese Border Defence Units deployed and garrisoned along the entire LAC are directly under the PLA, which is surely not mere “policing” duties.

– The Army has a comprehensive (in as much there is) intelligence setup and has wherewithal for intelligence gathering and substantial surveillance resources.

Domination of LAC by patrolling by both Army and ITBP, is a wasteful duplication of effort.

– The Army has a secure radio and static line communication network with adequate redundancies built-in for exercising optimal operational command and control.

– The Army has a well structured tiered establishment for force buildup and undertakes an emergent or graduated operational response at the place of its own choosing right across the entire LAC. Provided the field commanders are not constrained at the tactical level, due to a politically cautious stance.

Operational Milieu.

– Army and ITBP posts are often co-located but operating independently. Command and control is exercised along two parallel verticals with informal personality based lateral inter-action.

– Domination of LAC by patrolling by both Army and ITBP, is a wasteful duplication of effort.

– Inter-communication between Army and ITBP is adhoc and is mainly provided from Army resources. ITBP’s integral radio equipment is incompatible with equipment currently in use by the Army. Consequently the ITBP personnel are required to be trained on it. Given the nature of the high altitude of the region there is frequent movement of such personnel making the whole exercise temporary and fragmented.

The Army is the Nations “punch”. It should be asserting its strength through fire power and guts not “military diplomacy”. The Nation has to speak from a position of strength. The Army gives it this strength. It needs to be recognized.

– New raisings in ITBP units a unilateral undertaking by MHA and ITBP without heed to the overall security fallout along the LAC by this augmentation.


– With a Police force deployed on the LAC, the Chinese will interpret it as a tacit acceptance of the Indian Government that the LAC is not a “LIVE” border that needs to be guarded by military forces. A benign approach to the whole India-China Boundary question.

– To accept ITBP as the first responder to a conventional tactical situation without requisite integral support with heavier weapons and combat support in the form of dedicated artillery or air support is willfully making them “cannon fodder” by powers that be.

– Constraining the tactical initiative of tactical field commanders by a policy of restraint and reticence will always allow the PLA to wrest the initiative in battle.

– Any form of pre-emption or “cold start” by the Army is not feasible in these circumstances. Indian Army will only be fire fighting to save its glorious image.

– The Army is the Nations “punch”. It should be asserting its strength through fire power and guts not “military diplomacy”. The Nation has to speak from a position of strength. The Army gives it this strength. It needs to be recognized.

The Revamping Necessary.

– Place all ITBP forces deployed along the LAC under the Army for operational control.

– Induction of new equipment into the Force, should as a policy, be cleared by the Army from the technical and logistic compatibility point of view.


– MHA’s reluctance to place the ITBP under the Army is indicative of the underlying resistance of the IPS lobby to serve under any commander from the Army. IPS as seen from the factual ground realities considers itself as an “administrative cadre” akin to IAS. They loathe the notion of leading from the front as field commanders. The direct entry ITBP young officers endorse the requirement of operating under the Army.

– What is of paramount importance is National Security Interests. This cannot be hijacked by some blatant parochial group interest. The matter is too serious to be left to the whims or fancy of the bureaucracy. If the MHA cannot decide then let the people decide whose security is the Government of India’s responsibility.

Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

Lt Gen (Dr) JS Bajwa

is Editor Indian Defence Review and former Chief of Staff, Eastern Command and Director General Infantry.  He has authored two books Modernisation of the People's Liberation Army and  Modernisation of the Chinese PLA

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left

56 thoughts on “China: LAC impasse and Army-ITBP spat


  2. Who told this gentleman that ITBP officers are willing to be under Army control during peace time? His basic facts are false which shows that he lacks in-depth knowledge of the issues at hand. Else he is deliberately twisting the argument to fit his world view. He does not even know that ITBP battalions in Leh are under its Sector Headquarters in Leh itself and not in Srinagar. Please tell this ill-informed Lt Gen that if the Army is so confident of its capabilities vis-a-vis China why do they shy away from being ahead of ITBP? All Army war-games at various levels are wonders of imagination far removed from existing ground realities. As ITBP is border guarding force in peace time it can function independently which is why the GoI has more than one agency as its eyes and ears. Else the Army will do another Kargil along the India-China border. There is nothing called incompatible radio sets. If the Army shares its frequencies and encryptions with the ITBP the radio sets with ITBP can easily interact with the sets of Army. This has already been experimented successfully amongst ITBP and Army battalion commanders in few forward areas. Obviously, this gentleman is not aware of this simple fact as he may have been busy playing golf at that time. Besides, when ITBP comes under Army operational control in hot war scenario will the Army even then not share its frequencies with ITBP? Or maybe Lt Gen like him will then try to procure new sets for ITBP so that they can make a commission out of it. The training and standards of the Army are not as “high” as they claim to be. The only punch that the Army has is when their jawans and officers fist fight amongst themselves like street goons. Or else they offer themselves meekly to be either disrobed by the PLA personnel or have their heads cut-off by Paki militants, with the Army higher command either busy hankering for more allowances or investing in share bazaar. First place your own house in order before pointing fingers.

    • Anupreet, I sense an inexplicable complex in your thinking . Either you are insecure or you have been ill- treated at some stage of your career or more likely by your Country. Your resorting to frivolous and meaningless rants does in no way influence the very interesting discussion going on in this forum.Instead of giving some credible,meaningful and logical arguments to cement your case, you are spewing venom and garbage. If any one was to read what you are trying to put across, the only deduction is that the” IA is busy playing golf , getting soldiers be-headed,waiting for another Kargil,getting dis-robed by the PLA and its hierarchy is busy with the stock market with no time for training”. Anupreet , please –please , come on : be proud of yourself–you too are as patriotic, good or bad as any other Indian who wants the best for his Nation. Incompatibility of Radio Sets is only one of the more minor issues. Try and analyse what ails the higher defence organization of India. Do not belittle yourself because of some imaginary slight or some perceived psychological trauma. Anupreet , we expect a better response from you.Put up your case with a cool head now and lets have an intelligent debate from you .

    • Is this individual suffering from some disorder? The General is entitled to his views and strong exception needs to be taken for the language used. And by the way thanks to the ITBP, PLA had outings across the LAC as and when they chose to. And thanks to the nincompoop ministers and babus in GOI, the Army was restrained from acting against the incursions.

      Get your facts right about Kargil; read the KRC report before accusing the Army.

    • You seem to be out of your mind. The above gentleman is very much a hands on person with years of service instead of arm chair generals like you. Are you an Indian Army person or even remotely associated with it? WTF do you even know about paramil services that makes you an expert? He has clearly stated that the walkie-talkie type of handsets that the ITBP uses are HF radio sets which can be easily jammed electronically by signal jammers and also by snooping you can eavesdrop on other conversations because it transmits on Frequences within a given UHF or VHF range and is not secured link unlike the army which uses Secured (meaning Satellite link) channels. Satellite link channels are of different type and cannot be connected to UHF or VHF radio sets you bl00dy r_scal. Indian army is the only last institution of Honesty and Integrity left in India as every other big institution has been disenfranchised (look it up what it means). There may be bad apples but its largely made of people working in extremely hard conditions, away from family with poor and many times, non working equipment to guard b_st_rds like you. Shame on you. If this gentleman had free time and money to invest in share markets like you shamelessly said, he won’t be taking time to write such well researched in-depth articles. BTW, what is your calibre or credibility (look it up again) to even comment diatribes (look up again) on such articles of national significance?

      • Dear sir
        what anupreet has written is correct he is seen the borders more than perhaps you. the article is written with single perspective of bringing Army into affairs of ITBP, the Force is operating since 1962 and do more than what Army does in terms of patrolling, a fact that can be ascertained and further you their officers number in terms of participation..and you call about arm chair strategists . it starts wit factual inaccuracies as there is one DIG in Leh itself and other is in Srinagar which is a different sector, that provides back up. brush up your facts and firstly see the condition of Assam Rifles and various scouts and what a mess has been there…

    • You are quite right Anupreet , this Army Gentleman seems to be living in the age before independence. I request Army brass to get hold of the realities, ITBP or any other CAPF officers are equally capable to work independently. Army officers can only make hue and cry in front of pay commissions, whereas CAPF personnel undertake tougher duties and postings for lesser payscales gallantly. We dont need Army golfers or IPS babus , both of them are interested in self serving and creating more high level posts available for their cadres. It is a known fact that these supposedly tough army officers dont even undergo any physical efficiency test during their recruitment. SSBs have become a place for harboring nepotism. They are much better off in their cantts because CAPFs can manage to do all the tough duty while they relax. Its due to articles like these that Army officers are losing their respect in eyes of civillians day by day.

    • Lol your views are self il informed wahat did you say army will do another kargil?? Did indian army was behind kargil, dear dont be a cry baby though neither i’m a ITBP personal nor armyman still have that much general knowledge how much effective are the CAPF there is ongoing intrusion from PLA and our ill equiped ITBP even dare to challange them, if you haven’t watch the video of faceoff between PLA and army soldiers thats your fault and i bet non of ITBP officer can dare to take steps like this today there is no chance of war large scale war rather nations are using other estates covert op cyber ops etc.

  3. Levis parties on govt (public) money be banned in army. Allowances may be given instead of free ration, subsidy may be given instead of CSD to curve the black marketing in border areas. In defence ministry no IAS be posted. Paramilitary forces be withdrawn from Chinese border let army be lead on front, Deputation out of army be stopped to get rid of deficiency crisis of officers. Then only real dedicated warriors can be prepared.

  4. It seems contradictory what the General says here with what the strategic analyst Sandhya Jain writes in the adjoining article “China: Stooping to succumb| Date:13 May , 20131 ” in the same edition of IDR: “The Indo-Tibetan Border Police detected the intrusion on the intervening night of April 15-16 and pushed the soldiers back across Rakhi Nallah. But New Delhi failed to deploy the Army immediately….
    In 1986, a PLA unit marched seven kilometres inside the Line of Actual Control at Somdurong Chu, … General K Sundarji airlifted troops and surrounded their camp; placed artillery on nearby heights and asked a unit to erect tents just 10 metres away. The Chinese withdrew; they respond to big sticks, not big words. General Bikram Singh could have similarly handled matters at his own level at little cost; deferring to New Delhi was a mistake. Briefing the Cabinet Committee on Security some days ago, the General reportedly suggested cutting off the supply lines of the Chinese troops at Rakhi Nallah, something he should have done himself.” The question is what General Bajwa has to say to this? Also, I watched a NDTV discussion where the ex Army Chief Malik openly stated that, due to lack of infra-structure, the Indian Army could not have been able push the PLA back. Why could not the present Army Chief do the same in this case as Gen Sundarji in the past – there were no infrastructure in Arunachal then either?

    • Levis parties on govt (public) money be banned in army. Allowances may be given instead of free ration, subsidy may be given instead of CSD to curve the black marketing in border areas. In defence ministry no IAS be posted. Paramilitary forces be withdrawn from Chinese border let army be lead on front, Deputation out of army be stopped to get rid of deficiency crisis of officers. Then only real dedicated warriors can be prepared.

  5. sir, regarding the command structure of itbp in ladakh…. the DIG commands from choglamsar in leh and not from srinagar..and he has seen the area of dispute apart from the complete LAC on foot…..unlike the local army commanders who prefer to study the area from air and become experts on the terrain. it is my request that you verify from the local army commander if he has seen sub sector north and all important points by land route….

    • What is being suggested is to put into place an institutional mechanism to be responsive in a wide spectrum of contingencies that can arise in the future. To insinuate at a personal level detracts from the crux of an issue. It is not about who is better Army or ITBP but what is in the larger security interest of the Nation.

  6. There are some mortals on earth who can speak from a crowd . One must consider those comments as such. I am sure this fellow Chankya has not taken himself to be Chankya of Maurya period. He must be given due respect for his
    3 rd century thought. Dear Chankya wake up, it is 21 st century . police deployed woke up only when Chinese knocked up at the door.where was this force when dear Chinese were moving into the area. Is it not a matter of shame.? Oh yes , I
    Thought Himveer means Ice warrior.good filmy name.ha ha. We are not in movies. Working with frozen ice age thoughts is dangerous in any profession. So ,it is better to emerge out of 3rd c and ice age. Work together to join Gandhar to patliputra and beyond. Regards.

    • Hahahahaha. this comment shows frustration not discussion. Plz b a little mature while commenting in public forum. Let everybody speak, If we have something to reply with good logic, we should respond.

    • Intellectualism of bankruptcy does qualify any one to be called as niggler. Whether the Chankya hails from Maurayan dynasty or Himveers are filmi characters, it is not our concern to deal with some implacable character. Set your house in order before taking a dig at others. This Police is better equipped to handle itself.

      We should not accept the reason that the border with China is un-demarcated. If it is so, let Army take over and enjoy as ITBP in their opinion is enjoying. Instead of overcoming own established problems, some irrational thinkers have made it a personal issue. Let me then make it clear, we in our Khakhi police have no scandal of ration, no scandal of “catch-up”, no case of mutiny since inception (Remember Nayoma and Samba), no buzzers selling liquor in civil area, no case of grabbing housing project of other ranks, no case of “fake encounter”. Now happy??? or need more examples??

      A Defence Minister who cannot read a hospital register recording the date of birth of his Chief of Army Staff can hardly be expected to read a map and discern Chinese inroads to the extent of an admitted 19-kms. So it was no surprise that Mr. AK Anthony remained near-invisible after Beijing’s latest land grab became public, though protection of our borders is his foremost duty.

      ITBP not only detected the intrusion on the intervening night of April 15-16 but also pushed PLA towards Rakhi Nallah. But where was holy cow called as Army? Briefing the CCS some days ago, the COAS, suggested cutting off the supply lines of the Chinese troops at Rakhi Nallah, something he should have done himself. Army in fact failed to deploy troops immediately and soon five Chinese tents (with armed troops and fierce Molosser dogs) came up at Daulat Beg Oldi,

      Some one need to remind what happened to AR in 1986. A PLA unit marched seven kilometres inside the Line of Actual Control at Somdurong Chu, Arunachal Pradesh. AR was under Army. Stop pointing fingers. Take care of your motto….

  7. Please read the latest updates on the issue. I oftenly tell youngsters to have voice in the throat and fire in the belly but be discursive in your approach and opinion . Please do not write something to score a point as we do in basket ball game. Be polite & and dignified.

    Border face-off between India and China seems to have cooled for now but there is considerable anger within the government against the army for giving inaccurate details regarding Chumar sector in Ladakh.

    The army had built bunkers and started undertaking aggressive border patrolling in Chumar in early April, according to highly placed sources. This had prompted China to play it off in Daulat Beg Oldi sector in the north of Chumar by undertaking a 19 kilometers incursion inside the Indian territory and pitching tents in Rakinala.

    sources revealed that the high-level China Study Group (CSG) — consisting of national security advisor Shiv Shankar Menon, cabinet secretary Ajit Seth, defence secretary Shashikant Sharma, home secretary RK Singh and top heads of the central security agencies — took a very dim view of the army giving an inaccurate picture of its manoeuvres in Chumar.

    When the CSG sat down to take stock of the Chinese incursion on April 15, the army had apparently said that it had only set up some makeshift shelters in Chumar sector to take care of its troops in times of need.

    Within the next couple of days, the CSG gathered evidence about the army’s actual position from independent sources and confirmed it with the agencies. The information proved that the army had given inaccurate information and was building bunkers that were not in line with the 2005 Border Patrol protocol singed by the two countries. On being asked the army denied having undertaken construction of any bunkers or intensifying patrolling in Chumar sector.

    The episode has prompted the CSG to take a strong view of maintaining the independence of the ITBP and not to handover its operational control to the army.

    • Let us not be so puerile with our understanding of facts, no one is questioning the integrity of the Force. Patriotism is not a virtue for quantification. The larger issue is not of tactical use of weapons or the fire power ( this opportunity may never arise, given the very very defensive stand of CSG on the whole issue) but of intent of operational command. ITBP is an early warning element during peace time which keep policing the border and should be treated as such. This does not mean that ITBP is akin to civil police. People should understand in clear terms.In the instant case also ITBP had reported the incursion within minimum shortest possible time.
      Please do not compare unequals. Look inwards and without pointing much of the mistakes of others , let us agree on certain points which concern all of us and unequivocally it is the national security which has common enemy. The debate and useless discussion encompassing irrelevant factors is better left to 543 plus 250 members…

  8. Dear Chankya, I appreciate your considered and rational expression of the problem. Drawing an analogy – each finger of the hand used individually has much less power than when clenched into a fist. Shouting at each other in a discussion only hardens the respective stance of both parties and logic or rationality is the casualty. We need to ensure that the powers that be do not allow National Interest to be sacrificed for any lesser petty turf objectives. As mentioned I visited DBO in mid-Feb earlier this year. Seeing the men of the Army and ITBP standing to meet me in minus 20 degrees Celsius (with bright sun shining) with winds at 40 knots, is moving feeling, all of them were symbols of dedication and spirit of do or die. Such lives cannot be allowed to be sacrificed cheaply. All measures must be taken to ensure this. Regards to you

  9. — Hello Kush , Ravi–Greetings. kindly do not take anything personal–the aim was never to put you or anyone on the defensive , but to state and put on record the chaotic system in place today ,in which various Agencies are entrusted with the responsibility of maintainig the sovereignity of the Nation and in which each controlling authority is more interested in turf battles and one upmanship , rather than seamless integeration of all resources under unified command ie a single point authority from which all such operational decisions flow and who is accountable to the Nation.Unless the entire military might is so channeled and the weight of the entire Nation(the people,politicians and the bureaucracy ), is brougt to bear , we will always be the losers,remember no Army wins a war and no Army loses a war –these victories and defeats are always of the Nation and its people. Do not forget what happened in Vietnam , Afghanistan , Iraq or closer home , to the IPKF .
    What have we achieved today???Do you think the Chinese have gone permanently and this face -off will not happen again ??This nibbling or your borders.Next time we may land up in a worse situation for which the Country and its Armed Forces may have to pay a very heavy price.Remember Chamberlain coming back from Berlin waving that useless piece of paper —”peace in our times!!”.And for how long???So lets not have Armies –better to have only one Army to maintain the sanctity of the Country’s borders and it is high time , as a mature and progressive Nation , we implement the recommendations of the Kargil Report and entrust the defence of our Country to the right Force and with the correct backing and a foolproof command and control structure.

    • rightly said. But please go through the article, defaming any established organisation or blaming somebody to justify one’s logic is not d right way. you may be right in your logic but it doesn’t mean incapability of another. Most of us respect army like anything. But we also like the forces like CRPF, BSF, ITBP who are fighting everyday at every front and also ready to fight any of the battle during war for which army oppose to let them be declared as martyr. If you r honest I will stand behind you like I stood behind Anna Hazare. If things are tailored for something else at d name of national security I don’t think 12 Lac of strong army will be super Army having control of any Para military force. for the purpose restructuring and quality in training of army is required. Please go ahead as Govt spare a handsome budget to army from hard earned money of Common Indian. Pleas justify expenditure by sowing efficiency in preparation of any unfortunate action by these rouge contries.

  10. From the comments it is evident that there is more of emotional reaction to the issue than a calm rational thought. The vituperative diatribe directed at the author and the Army is no positive contribution to a discussion. There have to be different views but these need to be sans caustic and vitriolic outbursts.
    There is need to visualise of how events would have unfolded had PLA used military force. Escalation beyond a few rounds of rifle fire or a tactical skirmish would require powerful and forceful response, for which the army with all its resources would have to step in. The men of the ITBP would, without doubt, have matched man for man in every way, but would be handicapped because of the equipment which has been authorized to fulfill its basic role . Without specifying, the ITBP cannot be equipped with all the combat support resources like the Army. Therefore, a coordinated reaction, ab initio, is warranted in the overall security interest over any turf interests. Sacrificing brave men at the altar of irrationality will indeed be a sad commentary on the powers that be.

    • Sir, what you have highlighted is a genuine concern. There is no place for emotions and personal opinions on more serious issues involving national security. Your rationality is cogent. Let the sanity of nationalism not get drowned in the cacophony of good and bad, rather the larger issue of national security be accorded priority.
      The restrictions imposed by the China Study Group on the operational functioning of Army and ITBP on the borders warrant a holistic review. Our hands are tied and then we are asked to be impudent with out any impetuosity in our approach. The “banner diplomacy” has failed. Our adversary laugh at us. Why on earth we have to enter into our own area under the cover of darkness and leave tell tale signs within own perceived territory? Don’t we indicate that we are on a wet wicket?
      Some years back, when question of road connectivity was being discussed, to my utter surprise, one of the Senior Army Cdr roared that we should not develop anything along border as that would be used by the enemy forces. Why this sheepish approach? Till date our over defensive approach has taken us no where. Our serious reservations on infra structure development on own side has pushed our preparedness into enigmatic situation. The other side do not have BOPs as close to the LAC as we have. They have better road connectivity. Instead of pondering on these issues we are groping in dark. Even the integration of INSAS weapon system has not matrialised till date. The world is progressing at faster pace and we are busy in no work. These are not the signs of a great country.
      Unified Command in the disturbed area has not succeeded till the political will was not there. Plethora of agencies are not good in any of the robust system. But we are a country of paradoxes. Perhaps many of us give undue weightage to our adversary by saying that we are under his effective range, forgetting that so is he under our range.

  11. I hope before giving any expertise opinion on any matter, First -you have to think what you are going to say. Second -up date your knowledge. Third- About Medea- before publish – please check whether saying truth or not.

    Check about article and you will certainly encroach the truth.

  12. Sickening –I was dismayed reading the absolutely unprofessional , irrelevant and puerile comments of certain self styled ,half trained armchair military strategists ( Himveer, Chanakya and Sakshi,M G Kapoor to name a few ). I thought that the ilk of the types of Krishna Menon and his bureaucratic cohorts whose shortsightedness had once so effectively ruined a Country along with its wonderful and professional Army , had been consigned to the dustbin of history . Apparently ,we as Indians do not learn from history.George Santayana , could you please teach something to the Indian politicians and the abysmal bureaucracy of this Nation which has made the Country a laughing stock. Gen Bajwa has very succinctly explained the malaise which has affected the very security and functioning of this Country,mainly because of the machinations of the political hierarchy and the IAS lobby (read MEA , MHA and MoD). So , ultimately who is responsible for the Borders/LAC/LOC?? The MHA–??? because the BSF and the ITBP come under the MHA .Or the MoD ,which in any case has nothing in common with the Chiefs and the Services! Or is it the MEA , so that we can go whining to the UN. Why involve the Army Chief and the Services at all in this classic case of bungling by the babu’s and the politicians?? Not only are the ITBP/BSF not under the control of the Army ,there is also a problem of inter-operability , training , communications as well as the command and control structure, not to mention accountability and ethos. Please note, this has nothing to do with the bravery , dependability and patriotism of the BSF and the ITBP. Have ten agencies looking after your borders and another ten looking after your intelligence and you have a recipe for disaster. Are we discussing National Security or Canteen Services and parity of ITBP( and RPF/BSF/CISF/ NSG//Armed Constabulary/IAS/IPS) with your Countrys Armed Forces??

  13. sir u need to update,…………. bdg level officer of itbp is available at leh, maj gen level officer at chandigargh. itbp is having best of communication equipment n operator . it is nt based on army for communication……… confirm from ground situation in joint LRP it is itbp equipment n operators which r realiable . young itbp officers never endorce for army command…….itbp is equipped with heavier wpns n pl also confirm that more independent n self equipped than infantry bn of IA……………

    • Subhash, Your inputs well taken. However it does not alter the necessity of “Single Point Control” of all forces deployed on the LAC. There is logic to it and it is therefore applied on the Line of Control opposite Pakistan where BSF units are under operational control of the Army. That model also needs to be replicated on the LAC.

        • Himveer, those inputs do not alter the basic thrust. The Modernisation of the force still dose not enable it to deal with a live borer through remote control. The command elements have to lead from the front. That is military leadership ethos. Please go through responses given by me and the supplementary brief too. . I visited DBO on 17 Feb and landed there and met with both the Army and ITBP personnel. My fullest regards for these dedicated men there. They should not be let down because of some turf tussles between the hierarchies. See it in a dispassionate light. Regards to you.

  14. Great! with such less resources ITBP doing such a great job, Unbelievable. Army should enhance its capabilities with selection of its good officers to avoid such cases of Chinese incursion and kargil like failure in past. I read some news, Surprisingly ITBP detected this incursion with in 4 hrs unlike Army which could not do this in 6 months in kargil. though ITBP pushed back chinese by 9 KM on 15th Aprl only, army was unable to do anything inspite of expending 2,000,00,00,000,00/- Rs. Somebody should do something to stop corruption at the rank of generals In army because its very motivating to any of the enemy nation.
    ITBP should be modernized with its weaponry and EQPT.

    • Ravi, doubtless ITBP is a great force and no deriding the fact. What is of consequence is to ensure that their dedication and effort does not go waste. Hence if they are operating with the Army it is to enhance their operational capability with wherewithal and combat assets available with the army. You have missed the essence of the issue.

  15. Sir,
    After learning that you have served as Chief of Army Staff and DG Infantry, I cannot help but laugh at the naive and unprofessional way in which this article (if at all it falls into that category) has been written. Your facts are thoroughly incorrect and misleading. I wish you had remained in touch with the ground realities so as to avoid yourself making a laughing stock. A soldier never retires, he just fades away, but this does not mean that the professionalism and ability to honour the truth should get faded too. I sincerely request you not to write anything about which you do not have much knowledge or is it that you are knowingly twisting the facts to please a bunch of people?

  16. Gen J S Bajwa, has written a bundle of lies in the entire report. It is expected that Officer of his seniority must be writing after ascertaining the facts. His niggler approach toward the functioning of ITBP duly proves that he is having very less knowledge of the functioning of ITBP. The condemnation of IPS by Army Officers is cogently linked to the career progression and I wonder at this level of seniority also Army Officers continue to follow the dispensation of jealousy and hatred. The problem with IA is only one fold, it is their biggest drawback as well, they assume that their viewpoint is the only option available to everyone. As if there are no other courses of actions or avenues. They are expert in twisting the facts and ground realities as per their convenience. I can understand with such figment of imagination at higher level in Army, why it is loosing credibiblity. ITBP has DIG in Leh not in Srinager. The next formation of ITBP is at Chandigarh and final at Delhi.. Mind you ITBP is a border managing Force during peace time. Hence ITBP is fully justified to have its formation HQ in depth. ITBP troops do not enjoy the rustinc Army system of field and peace postings.
    Pay and perks of ITBP soldiers are different vis a vis Indian Army. When ITBP requests the government to provide facilities akin to Indian Army, the objection come from Army HQ.

    As regards to the first response to any tactical situation the Gen must be well informed. In order to switch over from no war no peace to war, there are certain indications which evolve over the period of time. When war is imminent, then it is but natural for IA to take over. After all what for IA continue to seat in depth area. They are mean to fight the external aggression. But they are smart enough to pitch for BSF and Assam Rifle to guard the most difficult areas on the border and keep comparitvely easy area for their troops and this is what they want ti replicate on ITBP as well. Come on what is Army looking ?

    • Chankya, in no way is the ITBP being belittled or their professionalism questioned. The issue is the need to have a coordinated command structure on the LAC since it is not an ordinary peace time border management situation. It emerges from any rational argument. Your harangue against the Army is unnecessary.

      • Gen sir. I m very honestly telling you, one should not try to cover such failures with en lighting weaknesses of others. I being an patriotic Indian had a lot of expectation with army, but now i hear nothing great about my Indian army other than corruption at highest level, Propaganda for getting much pay from 6th pay commissions by giving tailored and paid articles in most of the periodicals. I want my Indian army and its officer like real hero, not Indian Budget expending machine. please give some positive guidance to ITBP, CRPF, BSF for improvement instead favouring theory of laps by which Army has digested DRDO, BRO, Assam rifle, NCC, So many other deptt. Plz suggest something positive. And sorry sir I M not as good as you in language and in writing.

        • Ravi, The whole exercise is to enable the Indian Forces of any type present a cohesive, well coordinated effort to any threat. You may be aware that on the Line of Control opposite Pakistan the BSF units are deployed under the operational control of the Army because it is rational operational logic. Army is not doing so because of any motive to engage in ’empire building’. Its in the National security interest. You may re-read it more dispassionately and seen the logic.

          • Sir ITBP is very well doing job at the border & intrusion was detected within hours & informed to the Army within 10 minutes & it was ITBP QRT only who single handily pushed the Chinese troops 10 Km back & hold the Chinese there only till Army troops arrived only after 1 & half days later from their camp located at a distance of 40 Km.It was the Indian Army who did not let the ITBP officers attend the last flag meeting with the Chinese official on Sunday by saying that it was scheduled on Monday.They did not inform the outcome of flag meeting of Sunday to ITBP officials but leaked to media.The efforts of ITBP was appreciated by the Army Comdrs also.Sir it is requested to check these facts from your channel of Army also.Sir please check the strength of ITBP & Army strength at the SSN .Sir please respect ITBP

      • Sir, Point is without knowing the ground reality you a given number of facts which are completely wrong. You mentioned that DY Comdt sits at LEh and DIG at Srinagar. I could not understand who all have given these figures to you. Secondly ITBP have very good communication setup and for yr kind info they are compatible with each other, if doubt plz clarify fm yr fild commanders (( who can give you correct data not data lik u mentioned). Thirdly there is a very good relations betweem Army and ITBP at ground level. Fifthly ITBP’s role is entirely different and very much clear, plz study them. Moreover ITBP is eye and ear against dragon and they informed IA and all concerned imtdly, plz check record. As far as weaponary is concerned ITBP is not there to take on China, it is IAs role. Why do IA alwayz wants to take every CAPF under their command. Plz dont get jealous with IPS, they nvr demanded to have central command hqr at lko or units at peace location to serve under them. We should try to make one and one eleven not to make zero. Moreover you are supporting china that we had a different perception of LAC whereas at this time they violated the LAC. One more thing you said that New raisings in ITBP units is a unilateral decision of MHA which is completely wrong. Proposal was vetted by Defence Ministry as the requirement was projected by the field commanders of ARMY.

  17. Why do we forget that ITBP is another police force which is used/ misused for all types of needs by the MHA. they will never let go of these. Defense of country comes after the needs of rulers are met. Army is there to rush at the last moment with total improvisation, to die and to take the chestnuts out of fire if possible. If they fail we have recourse to another tear jerking song! So there is no need to fight and anlyse and criticize each other.

    • Madam, with due respect do not assume that Soldiers of IA are from other planet. They are from the land of this country and so are soldiers of ITBP. To assume that Army is more patriotic and others are less is a big big misnomer . Patriotism cannot be quantified. ITBP soldiers are deployed much ahead of Army all along the border. But Amry is no where ahead of ITBP. At some of the places it may be colocated. To say that ITBP is being misused as police, i think you need to know what is police and what is border guarding force. we are not like civil police and there is no interference of political masters in the functioning. Rather Army is more prone to such interference…

  18. This is correct analysis of the ground realities. The suggestions are those which would be easily given by any student in the DSSC. Coming from a Retd Army Cdr frankly I expected a more in deapth analysis covering and embracing all geo-political-economic aspects. Too ordinary an article from a Retd Army Cdr!

    • MG Kapoor, you have missed the main issue. Its not about the impasse BUT the limited aspect of the lack of “Single Point Control” of all forces deployed on the LAC. An issue that has been evaded by the MHA bureaucracy since 1986. So its more of setting our own house in order before tackling any external threat.

More Comments Loader Loading Comments