The Governor General's Files: Forces are top-heavy, cut the flab

Border defence and border policing are important aspects of national security. They require different approaches, and different organisations. Border defence is primarily the responsibility of the Army, requiring concentration of force at tactical locations not only for defence but for counter-offensives into enemy territory. Border policing is required to prevent infiltration and smuggling and also maintain law and order in the border areas. Primarily the responsibility of the paramilitary, it requires dispersal of force with platoon/company posts covering the border. There should be close cooperation between the Army and the paramilitary. In war, there should be unity on the border with paramilitary units working under the Army’s command.

During British rule our land borders were very tranquil. However, the tribes in the Northwest were turbulent, often carrying out raids into settled areas. The Army had to frequently carry out operations against tribesmen. This was considered good live training for war. The northern borders in the Himalayas had been peaceful from the dawn of history. The land borders in the east have dense jungles which were considered impenetrable. No military threat was visualised from that direction. However, during the Second World War, for the first time we faced an invasion from the east. The Japanese invasion was decisively defeated at Kohima and Imphal. However, the vulnerability of our eastern border was underscored again by the Chinese aggression in 1962.

During British rule, the jungle region beyond the Inner Line had no settled administration. Primitive tribes were allowed to live their secluded lives. They had not been exposed to civilisation and their way of life was no different from the way their ancestors lived several centuries ago. Head-hunting would take place among the tribes. Often punitive expeditions had to be undertaken against the tribes, specially when they descended from the mountains and raided the plains of Assam.

There were a few Scouts Battalions in the northwest for border policing commanded by majors from the Army, like the Gilgit Scouts, Tochi Scouts and Khurram Scouts, all working under Army formations in the region. In the East, the British started with the Cachar Levy in 1935 which was redesignated Assam Rifles in 1917. Army officers served on deputation with Assam Rifles battalions and Assam Rifles units took part in the First and Second World Wars. Exercising overall command of the Assam Rifles in Assam used to be a brigadier designated “IG Assam Rifles” working under Assam’s governor.

After Partition, our land borders with Pakistan both in the west and east became very live borders. Later, so did our borders in the north with China. Initially, we had no border police force on our borders with West and East Pakistan. Ad hoc arrangements were made for policing on the Indo-Pakistan border with State Armed Police units and militia/scouts. In 1965 the Border Security Force was raised to police the India-Pakistan border. Border policing normally requires platoon or company-level engagement. Anything on a larger scale should entail the regular Army taking over operations. The organisation, equipment and functioning of the border police should be tailored to this requirement and not to that of a parallel Army. The BSF, with 200 battalions, artillery and an air wing, is the world’s largest border guarding force.

Beyond border policing, it is tasked to be India’s first line of defence, have the capability for limited aggressive action and also defend an assigned sector. The BSF performed creditably in the east during the 1971 war. The other three border police organisations are the Indo-Tibetan Border Police of 50 battalions deployed on our northern border with China, 46 battalions of Assam Rifles in the Northeast, and now 70 battalions of the Sashastra Seema Bal for the India-Nepal border to prevent cross-border crime and smuggling. Thus, we have a total of 352 battalions for border policing working under the home ministry.

The 13-lakh-strong Indian Army is the third-largest Army in the world. Along with the Indian Navy and the Indian Air Force, it is required to defend the country. In view of the grave external and internal threats we face, we have to maintain large military and paramilitary forces. At the same time we must ensure we get rid of flab and improve the teeth-to-tail ratio so that our forces carry out their tasks effectively and economically. This will also release funds for acquiring modern weapons. The UK has cut its Army by 20 per cent, reducing its manpower by 82,000. The US Army is being reduced by 80,000 and China’s 2.3-million-strong People’s Liberation Army is being reduced by 3,00,000. The defence ministry has set up a committee to reduce the flab in our Army and to improve the teeth-to-tail ratio. A similar committee is required for the paramilitary forces, keeping in view the requirements of border policing. Economy can be effected by making them less top-heavy and possibly having some common training institutions.

All institutions of governance in India — civil, military and paramilitary — have become very top-heavy. This not only adds flab but also delays and clogs decision-making. It increases the proverbial red tape. Till the 1970s, a ministry in the Government of India had a secretary, some joint secretaries, deputy secretaries and undersecretaries. An additional secretary would sometimes be there, but that was not very common. Today we have a principal secretary, secretary, special secretary, additional secretary, director, deputy secretary, undersecretary, and now assistant secretary in ministries, increasing the levels of functioning in the Central Secretariat. Similarly in the states, where we had about half a dozen joint secretary-level officers, including the chief secretary, there are now dozens of secretary-level officers.

The police has also followed suit in a big way. New senior ranks above IG — Principal DG, DG, Special DG and Additional DG — have been introduced. Till the 1970s, the UP police had one officer in IG rank looking after the state police. Today UP has 131 officers of IG rank and above. Starting with a cadre review, the Army has also gone for large-scale rank upgradations. There are top-heavy and bloated headquarters at different levels. However, compared to the bureaucracy and the police, the Army has less flab on this account.

The committee set up by the defence ministry must reduce flab in the military and increase the teeth-to-tail ratio (teeth being the fighting element and supporting elements the tail). The teeth are considered more important in a fighting Army but cannot function without the tail. The correct balance must be achieved. Due to cross-border terrorism and insurgency, we have to keep a manpower-intensive Army. Reduction in combat units may be difficult and can only be marginal. The flab can be found more in our logistics set-up and in our top rank structure, particularly on staff at all headquarter levels. The Indian military must have adequate manpower and the most modern military hardware to enable India to be a leading world power.

The writer, a retired lieutenant-general, was Vice-Chief of Army Staff and has served as governor of Assam and Jammu and Kashmir