Armed forces should not be obliged to ensure success of Make In India
It has been reported in the media that the Indian Army and Indian Air Force are unlikely to accept the new Arjun main battle tank and the proposed advanced versions of the indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft. Many experts have criticised the decision saying it will prove to be the "death nail" in the process of defence indigenisation.
Naturally, agencies such as Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and various defence public sector undertakings are upset. It is obvious that years of their efforts and hard work are being rendered futile. Various conjectures are being drawn about who could benefit from the decision.
Globally, the business of defence acquisitions has been found marred by various controversies and almost every defence purchase gets criticised for one reason or the other.
Is the case for Arjun and Tejas any different? Probably, everything would depend on which side of the debate you are on.
There are some commentators who are trying to argue their case in favour of these systems based on some (convenient) technical facts while some argue that substandard systems should not be accepted. This piece does not make an argument either in favour of Arjun and Tejas or against them. However, there is a need to raise a very basic question - what is the responsibility of Indian armed forces towards ensuring Indian defence industry advances?
Basically, why do defence forces acquire military platforms and weaponry? What is the role of the armed forces in the acquisition? Common sense indicates that the central role of the armed forces is to safeguard the security interests of the nation. Countries like India have no expansionist ambitions so the forces are expected only to secure the borders and ensure India's geostrategic interests are safeguarded.
In addition, Indian armed forces are expected to come to the "aid of civil authorities" if called for. Over the years, Indian armed forces have played a major role in disaster management. The forces are also known for contribution towards the United Nations Peace Keeping missions. In short, there is no rule/regulation which makes it mandatory for the forces (and holds them responsible) to run both public and private defence industries.
Indian armed forces are expected to know their adversaries, their fighting potential, strategies, and tactics among others. They should have a larger understanding of what threats India is likely to face and they also need to factor in futuristic threats.
India's strategic areas of interest cover a wider geographical area from regions of Africa to South China Sea. Over the years the concept of "Indo-Pacific" is finding increasing traction globally indicating the need for larger Indian presence in Indian and Pacific Ocean region. India has a large diaspora working in different parts of the world with the major chunk being in West Asia. Hence, Indian armed forces are expected to meet various tactical and strategic challenges in these areas.
In order to remain fully prepared to address any eventuality, the forces equip themselves with appropriate equipment. To assist the forces, India - like many other countries - has developed a system for research development and manufacturing of defence equipment. Over the years, organisations such as DRDO, HAL and few others have played a significant role in enhancing India's security framework.
It is important to mention that owing to India's nuclear policies, the country's defence technology agencies suffered significantly from the technological apartheid. Over the years, all these agencies have delivered various useful products to the armed forces and would continue to do so in future. These agencies also drew their share of criticism too. However, by and large these agencies have served their purpose and a lot is expected from them in the future too. It is also important to ensure that the target of these organisations should not be single client (Indian armed forces) based. For the growth of these agencies, there is a need to establish a holistic policy on defence exports.
However, the larger question is, are defence forces responsible for ensuring that the defence industry flourishes? The forces are the end-users of any equipment. It is their life and reputation which is at stake. Armed forces decide on the type and quality of flying platforms or tanks based not on what is best available in the global market, but based on their own threat perceptions. They study their adversaries in detail from their doctrines, their war fighting capabilities, the military equipment held by them, nature of international assistance and possibilities of other militaries coming to their help during crises, the type of training they undergo, and their overall military industrial complex. This process would always remain dynamic.
Once the nature of a likely threat and the war-waging capabilities of the adversaries are clearly identified, the armed forces would fine-tune their strategies and tactics and try to equip themselves accordingly. So, if DRDO, HAL and ordinance factories are able to provide what is envisaged, then naturally there is no requirement of any imports.
It is the responsibility of Indian armed forces to project the correct requirements based on threat perceptions. Their assessment should be professional. Their job is to safeguard the security interest of the country, period. It is very naïve to say that the armed forces are failing India's defence industrial complex. Programmes such as Make In India have a meaning provided India is secure. This does not mean the development of indigenous military industrial complex should be stalled. For any armed force import dependence is not healthy. However, the question is whether armed forces should compromise on operational military readiness just to safeguard the process of indigenisation?
It is the job of the civilian administration to ensure that India's defence industry (both in public and private sector) develops and India's import dependence gets reduced. It is they who have to find a balance between defence forces' legitimate requirements and developing India's defence industry.
Indian Army's former general, VP Malik, had said, "we will fight with whatever we have". In democratic India, armed forces can have an opinion and a view. The final decision has to be taken by the government. So, if the government decides that in the larger interest of the growth of the Indian defence industry, armed forces should use only indigenous products, so be it. But it is incorrect to argue that armed forces are keen to have only imported equipment, they have been using various Made in India platforms which match their requirements. Armed forces are only giving a professional opinion and they should not be tried for being professional.
Also read: Why ban on sand mining in Madhya Pradesh has been lifted six months on