WAFF Vet Club[Click here to Join WAFF!] WAFF Moderators Forum
General Discussion
(The Den)
The World's Armed Forces Forum History, Politics, Economics and Religion Forum
Greece & Turkey Defence Forum Europe, Middle East & Africa
Defence Forum
Asia & Pacific Defence Forum
Help, Suggestions & Complaints
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Indian Security Forces 'Have Become More and More Like the Indian Government – Cautious, D

November 20 2011 at 8:56 PM

Provost  (Login MPOne)

Noted Author Blasts Indian Military's Ability to Confront China, Says: Indian Security Forces 'Have Become More and More Like the Indian Government Cautious, Defensive And Risk-Averse When It Comes to China'

[linked image]
Indian soldiers at a Republic Day parade in New Delhi

In a recent article, renowned Indian strategic affairs writer Bharat Karnad questioned the mental attitude preparedness of the Indian Army, Navy, and Air Force to confront China, which he described as India's "only consequential foe." Karnad's article comes amid the growing challenges from the Chinese military to the U.S. and Indian vessels in the South China Sea. In September 2011, Indian media reported that Chinese Navy confronted an Indian vessel off the coast of Vietnam.

Bharat Karnad, who has authored several books on India's strategic and nuclear policy, is a professor in national security studies at the Centre of Policy Studies (CPS), a research institute based in New Delhi. In his article titled "Indian Armed Forces Have China Syndrome," Karnad slammed the chiefs of the Indian military for not recognizing the growing Chinese threat to India's interests.

Karnad went on to argue that India needs to enter military-to-military collaborations with like-minded countries such as Vietnam to confront China, stating: "Whatever the Indian military's level of eagerness or the lack of it to go toe-to-toe with China, it may be prudent to arm on a priority basis a bold and plucky Vietnam, which has repeatedly shown that it takes no guff from anybody, with everything Hanoi desires, including the nuclearized Brahmos supersonic cruise missile."

Following are excerpts from the article:[1]

"As Soon as China Heaves into View, Our Military Leadership, Much Like the Indian Government, Freezes Up, Its Reluctance Reflecting a Deep Down Conviction that It Cannot Cope"

"Over the years, the Indian Armed Services have become more and more like the Indian government cautious, defensive, incremental in thought and action, and risk-averse when it comes to China, an adversary that's perhaps better endowed, if not more competent, in fighting wars. Willingness to tangle with an equal or superior foe is the measure by which would-be great powers [such as India] are judged. It is also a reasonable criterion for the citizenry to gauge whether the country, in fact, has secured military value and muscle for the vast monies expended on national defense.

"[A]s soon as China heaves into view, our military leadership, much like the Indian government, freezes up, its reluctance reflecting less the actual correlation of forces than a deep conviction that it cannot cope. This establishment attitude is everywhere, reflected most recently in former National Security Adviser Brajesh Mishra on a weekend television show saying point blank that India should do nothing to rile China until it is economically in a position to offer resistance - which is a recipe essentially to do nothing.

"The Army Chief, General V.K. Singh, has talked forthrightly of Chinese violations of the disputed border but, like his predecessors, done precious little to rid the army of its Pakistan fixation and transform it into a land force capable of taking the fight to the Chinese on the Tibetan plateau.

"To crow about [Indian Army's] two Mountain Divisions and additional two divisions under raising as meaningful offensive warfare capability in the Himalayas is misleading, as these constitute a force that is neither large enough nor potent enough to do more than beef up the defensive line 40-50 miles behind the Line of Actual Control [LAC], which pre-positioning ends up ceding this wide belt of border land to China before the hostilities even begin."

"[Indian] Navy is At the Sharp End of Imminent Military Confrontations, Which are Bound Increasingly to Determine the Nature of the Sino-Indian Strategic Equilibrium; But the Indian Navy Seems to Be in No Frame of Mind to Proactively Protect National Interests"

"The Indian Air Force, likewise, is air defense minded in the eastern theatre [vis-à-vis China], despite its having the largest complement of Tezpur and Chabua-based Su-30MKI, arguably the best combat and strike aircraft flying bar the F-22 Raptor, that can, if offensively deployed, keep the Chinese PLA on tenterhooks. But whatever the army and air force dispositions, the navy is at the sharp end of imminent military confrontations, which are bound increasingly to determine the nature of the Sino-Indian strategic equilibrium obtaining in the future.

"But the Indian Navy seems to be in no frame of mind to proactively protect national interests in the South China Sea, or anywhere else that Chinese ships may venture. This much may be gleaned from the op-ed piece by retired Admiral Arun Prakash ('Where are Our Ships Bound?,' Indian Express, Oct. 1, 2011). Astonishingly, Prakash blames [oil and gas exploration firm] ONGC Videsh Ltd. and MEA [Ministry of External Affairs] for trying to precipitate a confrontation in the South China Sea, which the former naval chief deems too distant for Delhi to 'take a stand on principle or adopt an assertive posture vis-a-vis China' particularly in the absence of 'a viable trans-national capability.'

"His reference is to the mid-July challenge by a suspected Chinese naval vessel to the amphibious assault ship INS Airavat [of India] steaming north from Nha Trang to Haiphong that went unreported until, possibly Hanoi, mindful of the fact that an aggressive China has the effect of leaving the Indian government and the Armed Services in a tizzy, sought to test Delhi's resolve to help protect India's energy stake in the South China Sea and Vietnam's 'territorial integrity' by leaking the news of this non-incident to the international press.

"The Indian government and MEA's instincts to run away from a fight with China were forestalled by the state visit of the Vietnamese president, Truong Tan Sang, resulting in surprisingly strong statements supportive of Vietnamese interests by the External Affairs Minister, S. M. Krishna."

"The Military's Unwillingness to Tangle with China, the Only Consequential Foe India Faces, is Rooted in a Host of Reasons; [India] is Still to Get a Service Chief of Staff Who Calls a Spade a Shovel"

"The more troubling thing is Admiral Prakash's implied contention that the Navy, in effect, ought to be allowed to choose its fights. That's not how it works. Wars are imposed by situation and circumstance or triggered by sustained violation of sovereignty or chance trampling of national interests.

"The military, navy included, better damn well be prepared for any contingency at all times. There is no excuse for trying to escape a fight by pleading logistical void and absence of wherewithal. Because then the question will be asked: What exactly has the navy, which ballyhoos its strategic mindset as much as it does its blue water capability build-up, been preparing for?

"The military's unwillingness to tangle with China, the only consequential foe India faces, is rooted in a host of reasons, among them the fact that the country is still to get a service chief of staff who calls a spade a shovel, and shakes up the national security establishment by ruthlessly restructuring his service with the Chinese threat primarily in mind, thereby seeding an operational reorientation of the Indian military as a whole north and eastward something desperately required if it means to be relevant in the unfolding geostrategics of the extended region and Asia."

"If We Lack the Stomach for a Fight Let's at Least Equip a Country [i.e. Vietnam] That Does Have the Guts to Take on China"

"Dealing with China demands finesse and forcefulness. So far what has been on view is the former, as configured by the ingloriously ambivalent MEA and a little-known body of appeasers comprising the 'China Study Group.' Too much nuance and too little counter-force has resulted in China gaining massive psychological and political advantage, further encouraging it to do as it pleases.

"Whatever the Indian military's level of eagerness or the lack of it to go toe-to-toe with China, it may be prudent to arm on a priority basis a bold and plucky Vietnam, that has repeatedly shown it takes no guff from anybody, with everything Hanoi desires, including the nuclearized Brahmos supersonic cruise missile.

"If we lack the stomach for a fight let's at least equip a country [i.e. Vietnam] that does have the guts to take on China. It will keep a worried Chinese South Seas Fleet tied to its Sanya base on Hainan Island because, sure as hell, it won't be the Indian Navy, which shies away from stressful encounters east of Malacca."


[1] www.bharatkarnad.com (India), October 14, 2011. The text of the article has been mildly edited for clarity.


[linked image]"The chief aim of all government is to preserve the freedom of the citizen. His control over his person, his property, his movements, his business, his desires should be restrained only so far as the public welfare imperatively demands. The world is in more danger of being governed too much than too little.

It is the teaching of all history that liberty can only be preserved in small areas. Local self-government is, therefore, indispensable to liberty. A centralized and distant bureaucracy is the worst of all tyranny.

Taxation can justly be levied for no purpose other than to provide revenue for the support of the government. To tax one person, class or section to provide revenue for the benefit of another is none the less robbery because done under the form of law and called taxation."

John W. Davis, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 1924. Davis was one of the greatest trial and appellate lawyers in US history. He also served as the US Ambassador to the UK.

 Respond to this message   
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
WAFF recommends these sites

Indian Defence Analysis      [Definitive Lapse of Reason]