Theatre commands only after defence strategy and higher body: Gen Naravane

Speaking at the 4th General K V Krishna Rao Memorial Lecture in New Delhi, General Naravane said, “Theaterisation is not an end, it is only a means to an end and that end has to be specified first in the form of a national defence strategy and that defence strategy has in turn to flow out of a national security strategy. Britain had a national security strategy that they should be able to tackle two navies at one time, not unlike a two-front war theory. Unless there is a national security strategy in place, to just keep talking about theaterisation is actually putting the cart before the horse.”

Drawing on his deductions in a lecture on ‘Theaterisation in the backdrop of Malayan Campaign and fall of Singapore’ during the Second World War, Naravane said once the national security strategy is in place, a higher defence organisation is required to act as an interface between the government – which has made the policy – and the commanders on the ground.

“This higher defence organisation has to reflect… the whole nation. It is nations which fight a war. It has to have representatives of all the ministries,” he said.

“Once decisions are arrived at, the armed forces are trained to do their job and all the other coordination must be carried out by this organisation. This organisation is required because within the strategy laid down, there may be other diplomatic or political considerations, which would limit the freedom of action which is given to the theatre command,” he said.

The former Army chief said that only once these two – the national security and defence strategy and a higher defence organisation – are in place, “can we start thinking about theatre commands.”

“The charter of these, the role they have to play… This has to come from the top. We cannot on our own say we will fight a two-front war. Has anybody said that? Or Is it just our own creation? What is the charter? Is the charter only defence of the borders and territorial waters? Or do we have to go deeper into an area of influence… area of interest? This has to come from the top. We cannot arrogate to ourselves these responsibilities. Once that is laid down, it will make our job of theaterisation much easier,” Naravane said.

In his keynote address, Army chief General Manoj Pande said, “As far as restructuring and reshaping the organisation is concerned, I think it is more to right size rather than reduce the size of our organisation. It also has to do with improving or getting the ‘tooth to tail’ ratio right and this requires that the number of legacy organisations (units, establishments) which we found of little or less relevance in today’s environment… we are either planning to completely do away with them or maybe rationalise the numbers or combine some of these organisations.”

The Army chief said, “In terms of focusing on only our core functions, certain non-core activities…is something which again we are looking at undertaking outsourcing in a big way.”

Hailing the Agnipath scheme as a unique and path-breaking reform, he said the Army had taken a number of steps in terms of recruitment, training and streamlining.

“What is heartening to see is the enthusiasm among young men who are reporting at the centres. We have upgraded training infrastructure, brought in more simulators, paid more attention to infusion of technology to make it more effective… Commanders at all levels have taken full and complete ownership of the (Agnipath) scheme and we are now focusing on correct implementation,” he said.

“‘Indigenise to modernise’ should be our mantra as we move forward,” he said.

General Pande highlighted four key aspects of transformation in the Indian Army: Human resource management; modernisation and infusion of technology; rebalancing, force restructuring and optimisation; jointness and better integration.