In a developing country like India, there would invariably be competing priorities for limited resources available. However, the two-front threat has highlighted the primacy of national security even if it means going slower in other sectors. In fact, the Chinese action of last two months has already forced us to enhance allocation to the BRO for development of border infrastructure.
trategy: The focus should be on overcoming the handicap of poor amenities in border areas and the lack of state-of-the-art weaponry.
The Chinese attempt at expansionism in east Ladakh has kept the attention of the nation riveted on national security for more than two months now. Hopefully, their policy of ‘creeping aggression’ would not ultimately be allowed to succeed in creating a new status quo which may then become the take-off point for future expansionism.
Trust has been the biggest casualty in dealing with the Chinese. Repeatedly, there have been attempts to gain undue advantage by subverting, misinterpreting and obfuscating decisions arrived at the negotiating table. Now that we are wiser to it, implementation of every agreement would need verification and continued monitoring. A sense of complacency is best avoided if we are able to extract any concessions.
The media has discussed threadbare the likely motivation that propelled the Chinese to engineer a Sino-Indian face-off. While that speculation continues, we need to look at various national security aspects from the Indian perspective and decide what needs to be done to make the nation secure from future predatory actions.
A nation cannot depend on others for its national security, especially if it wants to follow an independent and autonomous foreign policy. National interest overrides all other considerations in the current global geopolitical environment. Even for the all-powerful US, it is ‘America First’. Self-sufficiency in national security is an essential step for guarding India’s national interest if push comes to shove.
The anti-India nexus between China and Pakistan is well known. Since the 1960s, they have followed a coordinated and synchronised approach against India in all spheres. History has shown that while India was busy dealing with Pakistan in 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999, China did not start a war along the Sino-Indian border, possibly because Pakistan was firmly in the US camp. However, an assertive and expansionist China today is vying for global dominance. In case a major Sino-Indian confrontation occurs, the possibility of an opportunistic Pakistan trying to settle old scores by starting hostilities against India is strong.
India cannot ignore this threat. In fact, outlines of such an occurrence were visible during the Sino-Indian face-off in June with increased Pakistani ceasefire violations all along the Line of Control and attempts at pushing in a large number of jihadis into J&K. The reality of a two-front threat cannot be wished away. Should it materialise, we can adopt a defensive approach, which is likely to result in salami slicing of our territory from time to time. Conversely, we can adopt the better option of becoming strong enough to defend ourselves against any eventuality.
In a developing country like India, there would invariably be competing priorities for limited resources available. Poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, healthcare and infrastructure need major allocations for alleviation. However, the two-front threat has highlighted the primacy of national security even if it means going marginally slower in other sectors. In fact, the Chinese action in the last two months has already forced us to enhance allocation to the Border Roads Organisation (BRO) to Rs 11,800 crore for 2020-21 from Rs 8,050 crore in 2019-20 for the development of border infrastructure. Our rush to the US, France and Russia for quick delivery of contracted for as well as additional weaponry is indicative of crisis management which would not have occurred if we had allocated adequate resources ab initio.
As percentage of GDP, India’s defence budget has seen a continuously downward trend for over ten years now. Currently, it stands at approximately 1.49% of the GDP for this financial year. The then vice-chief of Army Staff, while deposing before the Defence Parliamentary Standing Committee in March 2018, had brought out that 68% of the Army equipment is reaching vintage levels, only 24% is current and just 7% is futuristic. The Air Force and Navy are not much better off. For the last two decades, the Chinese annual defence budget has been three to four times more than ours every year. Pakistan military too has ensured a lavish defence budget through the years. We need to enhance our budget to 3% of the GDP gradually to defend against a two-front threat.
Atmanirbhar Bharat is indeed an excellent initiative, which should in fact have been launched on gaining independence. It would ensure self-sufficiency in the sphere of national security, reduce dependence on costly imports, and provide greater bang for the limited bucks available. However, defence projects take 15-20 years to fructify. Make in India projects, commenced in 2014, are nowhere near completion so far. Until self-sufficiency is achieved, we have no choice but to import hardware to defend ourselves against the emerging threats.
The state of infrastructure in our border areas is poor which places us at a disadvantage and limits our options. Coupled with lack of state-of-the-art weaponry, it encourages a defensive mindset. While both these aspects are now receiving attention, there is a need to considerably hasten the entire process.
The incident at Galwan on June 15 has already highlighted two facts. First, the training and motivation of the Indian soldier vis-à-vis his opponent is far superior. Secondly, it is the language of firmness and strength which carries weight with our adversaries. We need to empower our soldiers to meet the challenge of the threats that lie ahead.