Relevance: GS Paper III (Defence & Internal Security)
Why has this issue cropped up?
Gen Bipin Rawat has called for plan to modernize army to prepare the army for 21st century conflict.
What does this modernization consist of?
- The army envisages a cut of some 1,50,000 troops, beginning with a cut of one-third within two years.
- The army hopes for a saving of Rs 5,000 crore to Rs 7,000 crore that could be used to boost its capital budget to buy new equipment.
Previous such modernization ideas
- In 1998, the army reduced its recruitment so as to cut its numbers by 50,000, with the hope that the expected saving of Rs 600 crore would help to buy new equipment. But, to its chagrin, it found that the government simply pocketed the money and there was no bonus in the 1999 budget.
- As for restructuring, in the early 2000s, when the army formulated its Cold Start Doctrine, it envisaged the reconfiguring of its divisions and corps into agile integrated battle groups (IBGs) which would be roughly the strength of a brigade.
- In 2017 the defence ministry had announced it was “redeploying” 57,000 personnel following recommendations of the Shekatkar Committee, set up to suggest measures to enhance the army’s combat potential and constrain its revenue expenditure.
Issues with the ideas of modernization
- The suggestions that cuts will take place in Signals and Supply units actually goes against the grain of modern warfare, which emphasizes quick moving forces and long range precision strikes enabled by specialized ISTR, EW and logistics units.
- There is no guarantee that the army’s savings will be given back to them. In India money is retained in the Consolidated Fund, and whatever is saved or left over, goes back into it. It’s not as though the money “belonged” to the army. The government would have to re-appropriate the alleged savings through the Union Budget process. Going by past experience, that is unlikely to happen.
- Reducing numbers does not necessarily translate into reducing expenditure. Indeed, in the short run, it will be the other way around. The reason is that there is need to invest in getting higher quality personnel, pay to train them into their new jobs and re-equip the army with an entire new range of weapons and systems.
Conclusion
It is worthwhile recalling the testimony of the army to Parliament’s Standing Committee on Defence earlier this year, that some 68% of the army’s equipment holdings belong to the “vintage” category, 24% current and 8% state of the art. A modern, war winning military needs to be state of the art in every dimension – doctrine, organization, equipment and quality of its personnel.
