Indian Defence Review

Singapore is a unique city-state of our times, which stands as a beacon for democracy, order and stability in this region. I am pleased to be here as a guest of the Republic of Singapore Navy, whose Chief, Admiral Ronnie Tay is present here.

Our two services share a close relationship of long standing, and over the years, we have developed mutual confidence and a great respect for each other’s professional abilities and attainments.

For navies, transformation encompasses not just the creation of capabilities by the use of technology, but also changes in organisational relationships, war fighting concepts and peacetime doctrines or standard operating procedures.

Navies have a deserved reputation for being extremely tradition-bound and conservative in their outlook. Historically, the “silent Service” has kept aloof from radical changes of all kinds; one exception being the Russian cruiser Aurora, which fired the opening shot of the October Revolution, in St. Petersburg. Navies treated with extreme caution even, technological change.

The steam engine, the torpedo, the airplane and many other innovations had to fight entrenched suspicion and scepticism to find their place in navies. Such conservatism led a senior Royal Navy officer at the turn of the century to condemn the submarine in these words: “…underhand and damned un-English. Treat all submarine crews as pirates and hang them!”

However, it must be admitted that a revolution that has been taken most seriously, by navies worldwide, is the one in Military Affairs or RMA. Of course, whether there is, in fact a revolution underway or not has also been a subject of debate. It has been suggested that military technology has actually been evolving over centuries, and examples of the crossbow, the horseman’s saddle and stirrup, gunpowder, tank, wireless, aeroplane and missiles are given as an example of this evolutionary continuum. So what is all the excitement about?

If we accept that “revolutions” are marked by non-linearity in the progression of events, then it has to be accepted that military affairs are indeed in the throes of a revolution. Since about the mid-1980s it has been apparent to discerning military observers that galloping advances in weapon, sensor, platform and information technology are indeed taking us on an exponential path. Having come to terms with RMA, militaries have started to internalize it, and that is how the term transformation has recently entered their lexicon.

Access to technology and the ability to absorb and exploit it will have a vital impact on the effectiveness of a Navy. A note of caution needs to be sounded at this juncture.

For navies, transformation encompasses not just the creation of capabilities by the use of technology, but also changes in organisational relationships, war fighting concepts and peacetime doctrines or standard operating procedures. Transformation is essentially based on a willingness to constantly challenge old thinking and introduce new concepts. This obviously means that the focus cannot be exclusively on technology and hardware, but must also embrace people.

Access to technology and the ability to absorb and exploit it will have a vital impact on the effectiveness of a Navy. A note of caution needs to be sounded at this juncture.

Transformation, as it is being talked about today, presumes the ready availability of cutting edge technology, and substantial funding as well as infrastructure to support the introduction of new concepts into service. With a few exceptions, the vast majority of navies are not only faced with a shortage of funds but also lack access to advanced technologies.

In this context, however there are two points to note. Firstly, we must remember that it is up to us to take as much or as little of transformation as we need. And secondly, we all have our strengths as well as weaknesses, but the synergy that results from cooperative engagement often renders disproportionate results. The need of our times is for neighbouring navies to work together to ensure maritime security for common benefit. Hence, in my opinion, while transformation is looked at, by individual navies they should also examine it in a wider frame of reference and see whether a possibility exists for collective transformation in which many of us can participate.

It will be my endeavour here to gently interweave cooperation with transformation. We have common maritime concerns, which should lead us to cooperate while attempting to transform our forces, and operations.

One of the lessons of the 2004 Tsunami was that navies must have the ability to access the coast easily from the sea, which is not always permitted by existing hulls. Developments have been undertaken to find unconventional hull forms that would combine shallow draft, higher speeds, better sea-keeping qualities, and improved survivability.

Before touching upon some of the transformational technologies required for tomorrow’s navies, it would be worthwhile examining some emerging strategic trends in the maritime arena, which I would term as drivers for maritime cooperation.

Firstly, globalization is cutting across national boundaries and leading to the evolution of linkages between cultures, economies and peoples. This growing economic integration is evident from increasing trade interdependence, and measures like the decision to establish an ASEAN Economic Community by 2020. Consequently, to borrow John Donne’s words, no nation remains an island anymore “entire of itself” – except perhaps in a purely geographical sense. Collective and not individual prosperity is the way of the future.

Secondly, the critical importance of energy security, which implies continuous and assured supply of energy resources such as oil, natural gas and coal, cannot be underestimated. Any challenge to the free flow of energy can lead to major conflict, which will have profound effects on regional and global economies. Ensuring energy security is therefore, a major maritime issue of common concern.