A US-style unified command would sharpen India’s military edge The Quint 19 Jan 17
The Prime Minister would be addressing the combined commanders conference in Dehra Doon on the 21st of this month. As per reports the army is scheduled to give a presentation on the establishment of ‘unified commands’ during the conference. This has immense significance for management of defence and national security, as it changes the very nature of the manner in which future wars would be fought. For the uninformed, unified commands signifies that all resources in a sector, irrespective of the service, would be under the command of one single entity, who would be called the theatre commander. This system has been in vogue for a long time in the US and has recently been adopted by China, amongst other western nations.
The US has adopted it for a specific reason. Their military has always been an expeditionary force, since they have never fought a battle on their soil. Since the first world war, the US has fought wars on other continents, hence needed a pattern of command which could integrate different branches of the military and marines into one cohesive fighting force. China has realized that one commander coordinating operations would maximize combat potential, rather than each service conducting operations. This change in concept came about in their recent military restructuring. Further, in the long term, it visualizes itself as playing a larger role in the international arena, mainly to protect its investments and interests spread across the globe.
India at present has four army, two air force and one naval command solely dedicated for operations against Pakistan. Hence seven commands are deployed against one enemy. Simultaneously, against China, there is one command each from the army and the air force. The service commands are located at different places, with the air force providing an advance HQs co-located with army commands. Each service plans operations primarily from their service viewpoint. The air force, for example, considers counter air operations as its priority, rather than providing support to ground troops. Coordination between commands of the same service as also inter-service are lacking, hence resources are never optimally employed.
Wars of the future would be short and intense, therefore demanding simultaneous employment of maximum combat potential. In this scenario, operations would never be single service specific. The ideal organization would be a theatre command, wherein, all resources deployed in a theatre of operations would function under one commander, irrespective of the service to which he belongs. Further, the number of HQs could reduce, saving manpower for better employment.
The system was being considered post Kargil, but faced maximum resistance within the services itself. In our existing scenario, the service chiefs are the almighty. They command and control their respective service, including allocation of resources as also coordination between different services, hence simultaneously function as force providers and force employers. In the case of the unified system, the operational commanders would be the theatre commanders, who would have a mix of resources specific to the area of operations and would therefore become force employers. The service chief’s role, would then only remain as force providers. This would dilute their power.
The present leadership of the military is now in the hands of mature leaders, who have participated in the Kargil war, in different appointments and have realized the importance of joint operations and maximum employment of combat potential, hence support this concept. They have accepted the necessity of joint operations, against individual service power. In the Indian context, there could be as few as four to five theatre commands, mainly due to terrain restrictions, apart from the already existing Andaman and Nicobar Command (ANC) and the Strategic Forces Command, which would continue as hither to fore. Amongst them could be two against Pakistan, with the northern one only comprising of the air force and army and the southern with all three services. China could have one with elements of the army and air force. Ideally the nation could create an ‘overseas operational command’ with all services integrated. Its role could involve conduct of operations overseas to protect Indian assets and in support of friendly nations. UN operations could also come under its purview. Resources of the navy from the eastern command could be reallocated to the ANC.
The command and control of theatre commanders would also undergo a change. Unlike the present system, where the senior commanders function under the service HQs, these would need to be directly under the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) and his HQs, the Integrated Defence Staff (IDS). The CDS, if correctly planned and implemented by the government, would be a part of the Ministry of Defence, hence the theatre commanders would function under the ministry and defence minister.
While the presentation may be made, however, taking major decisions in restructuring management of defence implies determination and clarity in the eyes of the government. It would need to bring about changes in a sequential manner. Thus, the first step to be undertaken would be the appointing a CDS, after which it could consider creating theatre commands. Management of defence in India needs to evolve with the times, especially as the nature of war undergoes a change. We cannot aim to fight a war in present times, with outdated concepts.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army