Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3766
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby deejay » 22 Jun 2017 09:42

ramana wrote:The PM has to impose the CDS on the military. No other way.
IAF has the max reluctance.


IAF's point is not entirely invalid given the small numbers of fighter squadron. It needs the ability to be cross functional across theaters to counter multi front action.

Now, I son't see why IAF cannot have a conditional agreement to this requirement say with a timeline of 2021 or 2025. As far as I see, Dhanoa Sir maybe making last of the IAF's stands against this move.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 22 Jun 2017 11:13

I agree Theater commands will highly reduce operational flexibility of IAF.

At same time the operational commands should have more bluntness. I think they are working on that.

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12913
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby negi » 22 Jun 2017 12:08

CDS is brainchild of someone who has no idea of how organization works ; integration of any separate entities has to happen organically for them to actually work in cohesion . I mean for a moment even if one assumes we have a CDS to whom all the 3 service chiefs report to in event of some military conflict the 3 services will act, respond and coordinate like the way they do it today CDS or not having a CDS will not make any difference for at most granular level nothing would have changed . However if you mean to actually achieve true tri service integration then lot of protocols and inter services communications will have to be established and fun part will begin when people will realize that there are simply too many redundancies to be removed before an effective tri services integration is to be achieved . Otherwise this non sense is just a project to find out some glamorous or dynamic jernail and appoint him to a post which is supposedly even higher than the service chiefs basically from national interests pov it is a sheer waste of time.

The right way to move forward is not to disrupt the system for the sake of it but instead ask the service chiefs to propose how can they better coordinate and work in synergy , what can they all bring to the table in terms of action plan for responding quickly to threats and coordinating things with relevant service arms . People cribbing here about the babus should realise that CDS in concept itself is nothing but installing a super babu.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3766
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby deejay » 22 Jun 2017 12:22

@negi, afaik, the whole set up is being proposed, not just the chair.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Aditya G » 22 Jun 2017 13:17

If CDS has to happen, in any shape or form, then it can happen only in modi govt. Parrikar was sure about it but clearly this is difficult to accomplish.

In midst of this of this the question of theatre commands was raised which to me sounds like a way to derail the integration process.

I find the position taken by ACM dhanoa the most practical way to implement CDS

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby jayasimha » 22 Jun 2017 14:02

something tells me that the day after CoNS Admiral Sunil Lanba who is current Chairman of the chiefs of staff committee (CoSC) retires,,

CDS will be appointed.

pattnayak
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby pattnayak » 11 Jul 2017 20:35

Image

Image

Seems there is some movement on the Aerospace, Cyber and Special Forces commands. Looks like we are taking baby steps, but steps none the less.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Aditya G » 01 Aug 2017 01:05

After notebandi and GST, one hopes that military reforms is the next set of deliverables from Modi govt.

Saikat Datta;

https://amp.scroll.in/article/845332/th ... it-succeed

On July 11, in a meeting of the commanders of the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force, the defence secretary let out a long held secret – that it was planning to tweak the existing military hierarchy to bring in new capabilities.

A briefly worded official statement promised a slew of measures that seemed to address the wars of the future. It said that the “defence secretary apprised the audience that the Defence Cyber and Space Agencies and Special Operations Division will soon become a reality”.

These measures seek to bring the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force under one roof, for better operational capabilities for the forces.

The integration of space and cyber warfare as separate divisions and a joint special operations unit is an idea that is at least 40 years too late. It is also one that should have been pushed through at the highest levels of the government, but has only found partial acceptance, even as India is seeing ties with Pakistan as well as China deteriorate.

Long-time coming
According to senior military sources, the decision to set these new structures up came from the National Security Advisor’s office, who had begun work on this soon after the attack on the Army base in Kashmir’s Uri, on September 18. The attack, in which 19 soldiers were killed, is believed to have been carried out by militants who crossed over to India from Pakistan.

While plans were afoot to respond to the Uri attacks, the government was also acutely aware that the Indian military was not prepared to fight modern-age battles and needed urgent reform. It had also been argued that terror attacks like the one in Uri could not be deterred by conventional means and India needed a sub-conventional capability.

The three vice chiefs of the Army, Navy and Air Force were asked to study these issues and prepare recommendations for the government. While reform of the higher defence management in India, including better coordination between the various divisions of the Armed Forces, has been recommended several times – from the Kargil Review Committee (1999) to the Naresh Chandra Task Force in 2012 – progress has been either tardy or non-existent. The result: an outdated military that has failed to integrate itself as a joint fighting force to fight modern battles.

According to sources, National Security Adivisor Ajit Doval took these lacunae up with the Prime Minister, Narendra Modi and the then Defence Minister Manohar Parikkar. As the military headquarters pored over plans, past reports were dug up as reference points. The group came up with the recommendation to finally set up a joint special operations division along with dedicated space and cyber agencies.

For over a decade the need for such joint commands had been repeatedly raised by various quarters. However, inter-services rivalry ensured that these proposals never took off. As a senior military officer pointed out, “…integration of the Ministry of Defence was a key proposal of the Kargil Review Committee. However, resistance from the government, the bureaucracy and surprisingly, the military, never allowed these reforms to take place.”

A senior naval officer, who was part of the plans to set up these new divisions, said, “We are making a small beginning and hoping that this succeeds. There’s a lot of resistance that we still need to overcome”.

The military continues to oppose joint or theatre commands – unified commands of the Army, Navy and Air Force that allow integration and better synergy between the three services. “Let us look at our Eastern borders,” the senior naval officer pointed out. “The Army’s command sits in Kolkata, West Bengal, the Air Force in Shillong, Meghalaya and the Navy in Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. How are we supposed to fight as a joint force?” Similar disorganisation exists on the Northern and Western fronts as well.

The tradition-bound Indian military can draw its lessons on the need for an integrated command from the US military, which learnt its lessons from a singular episode in its recent history. In 1980, when 52 US citizens were held hostage in Iran, President Jimmy Carter sanctioned an ambitious rescue plan. Code-named Operation Eagle Claw , the complex plan involved many forces coming together to land secretly 200 miles south of Tehran and rescue the hostages. The operation was a spectacular failure and led to a major reorganisation of the US military. The US Congress passed the Goldwater-Nichols Defense Reorganisation Act in 1986 and the Nunn-Cohen Amendment to the National Defense Authorisation Act 1987, that set up the Joint Special Operations Command, comprising special forces of the US Army, Navy and Air Force.

....

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 02 Aug 2017 21:33

I am reading FM Alan Broke War Diaries. He was CIGS during Worlod War II. He coordinated worldwide battles for Great Britain. He had no need for ADS.
Same with Gen George Marshal.
I think this CDS is fake battle by IA to restore primacy eroded by Congress party.

Capable generals to the top post is key.
Rest is all thunder. Not even lightning.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5108
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ShauryaT » 02 Aug 2017 23:45

ramana wrote:I am reading FM Alan Broke War Diaries. He was CIGS during Worlod War II. He coordinated worldwide battles for Great Britain. He had no need for ADS.
Same with Gen George Marshal.
I think this CDS is fake battle by IA to restore primacy eroded by Congress party.

Capable generals to the top post is key.
Rest is all thunder. Not even lightning.
While capability will continue to evolve, I view the inability to create a CDS driven command structure as the politician's unwillingness to let ANY serious state institution build strategic execution capabilities. This culture to NOT invest in organizational capabilities is a vestiture of the INC. Time to move away and build up state institution capabilities, defense being the primary one. WW2 was another era. Today's hybrid warfare under a nuke umbrella necessitates a more coordinated approach between political will, goals and objectives, planning and execution across the military spectrum. One can even argue that jointness of armed forces alone is not enough in the kind of environment we live in where the armed forces are not only engaged externally but internal security also. This is the reason we have the NSA take the lead for MI coordination. You also have the matter of resources, with our limited budgets cannot really afford to duplicate capabilities and be disjointed in basic capabilities, say SAM systems, rotary systems, aircrafts, etc.

PS: Not sure if I read your post correctly. If not, apologies. If read correctly, please expand on the fake battle part.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 03 Aug 2017 01:15

You are adding complexity to a simple problem. None of these things are beyond the capability of whoever gets appointed as the Chiefs of Staff. I think we should learn to move beyond whats available elsewhere and trying to fit square pegs in round holes or vice versa.


Do you dispute the highest commander-in-chief is the President?
The highest military officer regardless of which service he belongs to is the Chiefs of Staff?
The issue is he is also the chief of staff his service.
And hence could be pre-occupied with his service issues.
One way around is to appoint another officer as the head of that service.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Aditya G » 03 Aug 2017 02:20

ramana wrote:You are adding complexity to a simple problem. None of these things are beyond the capability of whoever gets appointed as the Chiefs of Staff. I think we should learn to move beyond whats available elsewhere and trying to fit square pegs in round holes or vice versa.


Do you dispute the highest commander-in-chief is the President?
The highest military officer regardless of which service he belongs to is the Chiefs of Staff?
The issue is he is also the chief of staff his service.
And hence could be pre-occupied with his service issues.
One way around is to appoint another officer as the head of that service.


I respectfully disagree with this Ramana.

The need for a tri-service commander is extremely crucial today as the Nuclear triad is in place. There should be single point command, control and military advise around the storage, training and employment of nuclear weapons. Presently, this is under a tri-service command, which lies outside the 3 chiefs of staff. This anomaly should be rectified with a tri-service chief as suggested by Naresh Chandra committee.

This version of the CDS will thus be over all triservice commands.

There is also a need for a Special Operations Command as by nature the deployment could be in any scenario, in any place and at short notice. History tells us that the best commanders are unable to gather and mobilise quickly due to assets not being at their disposal.

Aside from SOC, there is also scope for a rapid reaction division, whose core will be the 50th Parachute Brigade (Ind.), a LHD and amphib army infantry bde.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 03 Aug 2017 03:48

Too many commands spoil the broth.
The top most military officer is the Chiefs of Staff.
I don't see the reasom to create new commands.

India is not fighting a global war with theater commands.
It's myth that CDS is needed just because nukes are there.
As for SOC how many troops are there to create such a command? Not even a full division worth.

Let's cut our cloth to our needs.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 03 Aug 2017 03:50

We make it sound like CDS will give Brahmamantra upadesh!

Nothing like that will happen.
If strategic forces are out of COS then put them under.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4906
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Rakesh » 03 Aug 2017 04:50

Ramana, while I agree we need to cut our cloth to our needs, we also need to merge the commands under senior officers based on geographical location. For example, do we really need a Southern Command - HQ in Pune, Southern Naval Command - HQ in Kochi and a Southern Air Command - HQ in Trivandrum?

Both the links below are great for synergised commands.

http://brfrahulm.blogspot.ca/2013/10/un ... s-v01.html

https://www.bharat-rakshak.com/ARMY/tod ... ation.html

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35584
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby SaiK » 03 Aug 2017 05:43

is it okay to look at from the current shortcomings from existing CnC setup? where and what are we currently lacking? issues with regards to execution and control, operational difficulties, and capability issues, interoperability, and commanding issues, etc? we all know what are the most likely positives when we have a CDS, in terms of CnC.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5108
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ShauryaT » 10 Aug 2017 09:14

Case for a Joint Communication Command for the Indian Armed Forces

A new Defence Cyber Agency under the HQ IDS and headed by a Major General or equivalent rank officer is in the process of being established.

• Positive developments are also expected in the creation of the Chief of Defence Staff/Permanent Chairman Chiefs of Staff Committee, Joint Operational Commands, Special Forces Command and Aerospace Command.

• It is in this context that the creation of a Joint Communication Command (JCC) is being proposed as a part of the formalization of structures desired for joint war fighting.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 11 Aug 2017 06:38

Waht is needed is joint ness to fight on land sea and air. Instead Jointness in cyber and space is being enacted. Shows the faultlines.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16532
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby chetak » 11 Aug 2017 15:28

CDS basically removes the unwanted, unprofessional and essentially self-serving middleman approach of the baboo(n)s in the crucial interface between the Forces and the designated political authority.

This baboo(n) layer adds zilch to the mix as it has no professional competence to contribute anything to the objectives set solely by the political authority and the operations conducted solely by the Forces.

WTF did PN Haskar contribute at simla, when IG foolishly gave away all the hard won battle gains to let bhutto off the hook and left India holding the empty bag??

why did we not settle niggling border issues with the beedis at the same time?? traded some land elsewhere, to widen the chicken's neck and also get perpetual transit rights to the NE?? were they not patriotic?? did they not think of India??

Again, WTF were the baboo(n)s doing?? allegedly, our best and brightest.

They were shitting their collective pants fearing a military coup and this fear was reinforced by the nation wide popularity of the charismatic IA chief Sam Maneckshaw. This is also when these devious baboo(n)s convinced an already paranoid IG to cut the Forces down to size and degrade the status of the Forces in the public perception and that downward trajectory has since been maintained with great gusto and negatively reinforced by every IAS headed pay commission thereafter, including the very last one, the 7th.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4906
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Rakesh » 11 Aug 2017 16:53

‘Cruelty’ in uniform & Navy Act 1957
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/opinion/ ... -1957.html

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby vaibhav.n » 11 Aug 2017 18:00

No defence for the MoD
http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/letterfromwashington/no-defence-for-the-mod/

Frustration in the Pentagon is high because India is being, well, India. The inertia, the missed opportunities, the constant roadblocks, the procedural rigmarole, the control freak babus, the paranoia around civil-military separation and, above all, the lack of effective political leadership have brought India’s friends in Washington close to exhaustion.


A degree of ‘India fatigue’ appears to be setting in among US officials. India’s ministry of defence (MoD) has spawned a bank of stories in Washington, each more appalling than the last and all recounted with a tinge of sadness. The latest installment of sorry tales — the MoD missed the deadline for five free courses for Indian military officers at the US National War College. All three services wanted the courses. But mysterious processes at the MoD resulted in the forfeiture of more than $225,000 in US government funds allocated for India. The one-year fellowship is the most sought after by defence personnel from around the world, including India’s neighbours.


Perhaps, the MoD thinks interaction leads to ideological infection. Why else would bureaucrats limit bilateral visits to ‘2 in, 2 out’ — two incoming and two outgoing visits a year per service? If the Indian Navy wants to host a third US delegation in a calendar year, it can’t even if the Naval chief sees a pressing need to discuss matters.

Indian military officers have embarrassingly limited powers to make decisions. They can’t even decide if they can attend a seminar or a conference without MoD clearance. US officials have told me countless stories over the years about how three-star US generals have not been allowed to meet their Indian counterparts. Instead, an MoD or foreign office mandarin takes a seat. This is just stupid.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Deans » 16 Aug 2017 11:22

As far as theater commands are concerned, I buy the IAF's logic to some extent - i.e air assets can be deployed against both Pak and China so why
allot them to a specific theatre ? However, this contradicts the policy of multiple commands the IAF has. Where is the need for a South West command when all the aircraft in the SWAC (barring possibly Pune) have roughly the same reach as the Western command. Also why have an entire command for barely half a dozen fighter squadrons ? Central command also has 6 fighter squadrons under it.
Similarly, does the army really need a SW & Central command ?
There might be a significant amount of integration possible by just reducing commands, instead of integrating services under common commands.

Similarly, can the role of the CDS be that of Combining staff functions (as the expansion of CDS might suggest). Logistics, Medical services & Training are fairly obvious areas for integration under 1 head (there are 3 Lt Gen equivalents heading their respective medical service).

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2013
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Gaur » 16 Aug 2017 15:15

^^
Don't know about the rest, but Medical services are already deeply integrated. Doctors from Navy and AF are posted at Army hospitals and vice versa. Though rarely done, it is even possible to get your service changed (Eg: getting shifting from Army to Navy). There is also a Post of DG, Armed Forces Medical Services which heads all 3 (Army, AF, Navy).

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Deans » 19 Aug 2017 20:12

Gaur wrote:^^
Don't know about the rest, but Medical services are already deeply integrated. Doctors from Navy and AF are posted at Army hospitals and vice versa. Though rarely done, it is even possible to get your service changed (Eg: getting shifting from Army to Navy). There is also a Post of DG, Armed Forces Medical Services which heads all 3 (Army, AF, Navy).


Yes, Medical services are the best integrated, but even there, the head of the Medical service of each arm is a Lt Gen or his equivalent, though
they might be reporting to a 3 star DG.
The real gains (better coordination and less flab) will come IMO from integrating Logistics & transport, intelligence & police (we actually have 4 intel branches in the services - the 4th handles overseas intel gathered from military attaches) and training.
Also, services done by civilians can be outsourced - for e.g. Pay & accounts and Military engineering services.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3405
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Cosmo_R » 19 Aug 2017 22:21

chetak wrote:
WTF did PN Haskar contribute at simla, when IG foolishly gave away all the hard won battle gains to let bhutto off the hook and left India holding the empty bag??

why did we not settle niggling border issues with the beedis at the same time?? traded some land elsewhere, to widen the chicken's neck and also get perpetual transit rights to the NE?? were they not patriotic?? did they not think of India??

.....


PNH was a complete sucker upper as was TN Kaul and others. What they lacked in intellect, they made up for in arrogance.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16532
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby chetak » 20 Aug 2017 01:57

Cosmo_R wrote:
chetak wrote:
WTF did PN Haskar contribute at simla, when IG foolishly gave away all the hard won battle gains to let bhutto off the hook and left India holding the empty bag??

why did we not settle niggling border issues with the beedis at the same time?? traded some land elsewhere, to widen the chicken's neck and also get perpetual transit rights to the NE?? were they not patriotic?? did they not think of India??

.....


PNH was a complete sucker upper as was TN Kaul and others. What they lacked in intellect, they made up for in arrogance.


All baboo(n)s are like this onlee. generalist jokers who simply get by doing the same old, same old, every day and passing it off as "administration".

No imagination, just a fierce loyalty to their own perks and entitlements and ever ready to fight turf wars to defend their cardboard kingdoms, and the devil take the hindmost.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16262
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Rahul M » 20 Aug 2017 03:15

let's keep the focus on tri-services issues and not on dead bureaucrats.

the IAF objection doesn't hold water, IMHO, assets are moved around among commands all the time, why would it be any different when theatre commands come into being ? there's no reason to assume that a theatre commander would have a list of assets set in stone that cannot be changed. in fact, deciding who needs what is exactly the kind of thing a CDS and his tri-services staff would be expected to do !

the current system is not conducive to combined arms warfare. that is not to say great performance can't still be extracted out of the current system. but, if it happens it will be despite the system, not because of it. it requires a very strong share of luck in the form of extremely competent officers who are also willing to go out of their way to forego years of ingrained service rivalry to achieve that.
creating a system to achieve that objective is much preferable to depending on luck.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 20 Aug 2017 11:58

Dean's, we need to look at org charts to have clear understanding.
SWAC was created as Western command was found too stretched during 1971 war.

If the theater commands hold all assets, the Chiefs of Staff become central organizations that support matrix deployed forces. This is not what Indian military ethos is.

In 1971 war, Indian notary did work jointly. This was because of lessons learned from 1965 war. In Kargil those were forgotten and led to the 20 day gap.

I still think we should read Filed Marshall Alan Brooke War Diaries. It shows how WWII was fought with out CDS. India has at most a one month war spread over a theater on world wide scale.

CDS is a distraction. First augment the forces.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Aditya G » 20 Aug 2017 14:38

CDS and tri service commands are 2 separate debates. And need not be implemented together.

CDS should be established, and once established the military should further debate about theatre commands.

I agree with IAFs contention on not tying down air assets to theatres.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Aditya G » 16 Oct 2017 17:00

Wake me up when it happens

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... s-4892404/

Five years after they were first proposed by the Armed Forces, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) is expecting the three new tri-service agencies in the field of cyber warfare, space and special operations to be raised shortly. Their formation was announced by the MoD in July this year, and the proposal is with the government for approval. “The new Defence Minister is also keen on seeing them through, and we are just awaiting requisite approvals from the Law
Ministry and other government departments,” said an official source.


According to sources, the proposals for the three new formations — Defence Cyber Agency, Defence Space Agency and a Special Operations Division — are with other ministries for approval as the resources for them have to come from “accretion and not under save-and-raise”. The approvals are expected “within a couple of months”, said sources, after which these agencies, to be headed by officers of the rank of Major General and equivalent in the Navy and Indian Air Force, will be raised.

The cyber and space agencies will be based out of Delhi, for close coordination with their civilian counterparts, while the Special Operations Division will be based outside the national capital. The Special Operations Division will have components of the Special Forces of the Army, Navy and IAF, and will be equipped and trained together for various external contingencies. The Army currently has Special Forces battalions, Navy has Marine Commandos (Marcos) and IAF has Garud. This division, which will be based at a location which already has training infrastructure, will have two SF battalions at its core, along with teams from Marcos and Garud, sources explained.

Working in close coordination with the National Cyber Security Advisor, the Defence Cyber Agency will be have over 1,000 personnel. These experts will be distributed to various formations of the Army, Navy and IAF, and will focus on non-civilian cyber issues, including safeguarding critical infrastructure.

The Defence Space Agency will have over 200 personnel, who will work closely with ISRO and DRDO for better utilisation and integration of space resources. This includes information sharing from individual satellites, and surveillance from other satellites which can then be shared with the concerned defence service.

In 2012, the Chiefs of Staff Committee had recommended creation of three joint commands — in the areas of cyber, space and special operations — due to their increased relevance in modern warfare. The new joint military doctrine, released earlier this year, also underscores the need to prepare the defence forces for the “emerging triad” of space, cyberspace and special operations for future combat. But it was only in July this year that the Defence Secretary apprised the Unified Commanders Conference that the Defence Cyber & Space Agencies and Special Operations Division would soon become a reality.

While the 2012 proposal envisaged commands to be headed by army commander equivalents, the current proposal is only for agencies to be headed by Major Generals. Sources said the agencies may eventually be upgraded to commands, after they have stabilised in their functioning. As per the 2012 proposal, a Navy officer was to head the cyber warfare command, an IAF commander was to be at the helm of space command and an Army officer would head the Special Forces command. It is expected that the same arrangement for division of agencies between the three services will continue even now.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5108
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ShauryaT » 16 Oct 2017 19:24

x-post:
ShauryaT wrote:I guess something like this will fall under a "space command" or is it the exclusive domain of the IAF?

Space: Future Pivot of Strategic Stability?

‘Overall, strategic stability is a complex multi-political and multidisciplinary problem that requires the constant attention of political and military leaders, national experts who research national security issues, and scientists representing different fields. Therefore Strategic Stability concept is rooted in many disciplines/domains, to include International Relations, Political Science, Psychology, military theory and doctrines, weapons and technology, development of forces, C4I2SR. the last three aspects though terrestrial and located essentially at secure locations are now linked to space in a major way hence, ‘space is to be viewed in the context of continuation of terrestrial situation or nuclear stability’.....


Strategic Stability is intertwined with space stability in an extremely complex manner, beginning with early warning to damage measurement by own weapons, making it very vital devise means and methods to understand the complexities and intricacies involved. Space stability can maintain strategic stability unless political stability is disturbed and becomes the overriding factor for movement up the escalation ladder. Very limited understanding has been reached between nations to put in place treaties and agreements to keep space free from o ensive actions which may result in loss of space stability and consequently Strategic Stability. On the contrary, leading space nations are in the race to establish their lead or supremacy before any substantive agreements or treaty is discussed which may preclude to offensive actions in space. This makes it important that progress is made on reaching an understanding before some nations achieve dominant positions akin to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and then dictate terms. China is well ahead of India in space systems, and India too must increase its assets to meet the needs of national security by developing anti-satellite capabilities on priority. This is not difficult since India already has tested its BMD capability, which is more precise and complex vis-à-vis ASAT. In addition, India must keep ready many reserve satellites for launch on demand to cater for losses to first strike. There is an urgent need to develop capabilities for EW against adversaries for non-permanent kills and defence of own assets. Progress is required in cyber warfare to prevent space attacks. Own satellites must now be designed for constellations to ensure continuity under attack and defeat temporary loss of a few satellites. Emerging technologies o er great scope for developing new capabilities that are more resilient and robust and even self-generating, additive manufacturing and advanced materials are some examples. For India, it is extremely important to match China if not be ahead, time is not too far when Chinese assets will be available to Pakistan for the asking or use by China to perform tasks required by Pakistan, including o ensive actions against India’s space assets.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Aditya G » 05 Nov 2017 15:25

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/turf-w ... 513620.cms


TOI
SHARE
India
Turf wars and lack of political push make for half-baked defence reforms
Rajat Pandit | TNN |
Updated: Nov 5, 2017, 08:13 IST

TNN
File photo used for representation. (Reuters)
HIGHLIGHTS

There is “still no clarity” on the equally crucial and long-pending proposal for a tri-Service clandestine warfare arm or the Special Operations Directorate.

The pivotal reform of creating the post of a chief of defence staff over the three Service chiefs still does not figure anywhere on the horizon.

NEW DELHI: Continuing turf wars among the Army, Navy and IAF, lack of long-term strategic planning and the political leadership's sheer inability to push through genuine defence reforms in the country have led to the finalisation of highly-truncated unified organisations to handle the critical modern warfare domains of space and cyberspace.



To make matters worse, there is "still no clarity" on the equally crucial and long-pending proposal for a tri-Service clandestine warfare arm or the Special Operations Directorate (SOD).

Amid all this, the pivotal reform of creating the post of a chief of defence staff (CDS) over the three Service chiefs, which should be followed by integrated theatre commands in the long-run, still does not figure anywhere on the horizon despite being strongly recommended after the 1999 Kargil conflict.


The defence ministry has sent the proposals for the tri-Service Defence Space Agency and Defence Cyber Agency to the finance ministry for approval before they are placed before the Modi-led cabinet committee on security "in a month or so" for the final nod. "They may be small organisations but they do represent a step forward towards jointness among the Army, Navy and IAF," said a source.

"The Special Operations Directorate proposal has been referred back to the integrated defence staff because clarity is needed on its command and control structure as well as the assets to be placed under it. The Army, for instance, says it will retain control of its Para-Special Forces battalions but will operationally affiliate them to the SOD," he added.

The original proposal for full-fledged commands under Lt-Generals (three-star generals) to handle the rapidly-expanding challenges in space, cyberspace and clandestine warfare in a synergised manner has been gradually whittled down to setting up much smaller tri-Service organisations under Major-Generals (two-star), as was first reported by TOI earlier.

Sources say the Defence Space Agency will essentially be "a marriage" between the existing Defence Imagery Processing and Analysis Centre (Delhi) and the Defence Satellite Control Centre (Bhopal), with just about 100-200 new personnel being added to it.
"It will be a small technology-intensive agency that will work closely with Isro and DRDO. More assets will be brought under it progressively. The Navy, for instance, wants to retain control of its Rukmini (GSAT-7) satellite," said a source.
The existing Defence Information Assurance and Research Agency, in turn, will be upgraded into the Defence Cyber Agency. It will primarily be "defensive" in nature, with "cyber offensives" being left to other agencies under the national security adviser.
"A major issue was sorting out how the cyber agency will work under the country's information technology acts and legal provisions. It will be given flexibility to outsource, hire civilian experts, who will be brought under the Official Secrets Act," said the source.
The SOD, which is still to be finalised, will see the raising of two new Special Forces battalions. The Army (Para-SF), Navy (marine commandos) and IAF (Garud commandos) will continue to retain their own special forces.
Critics say all these are "piecemeal steps" when concrete measures are required to build the country's integrated land-air-sea war-fighting machinery, backed by effective space, cyberspace and special operations geared for the wars of the future.
China, incidentally, is developing potent military space and cyberspace capabilities, ranging from advanced ASAT (anti-satellite) and directed-energy laser weapons to cyber-weapons capable of crippling an adversary's information networks.
India has only two unified commands till now.
........m


Will
BRFite
Posts: 596
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Will » 06 Nov 2017 15:22

Aditya G wrote:CDS and tri service commands are 2 separate debates. And need not be implemented together.

CDS should be established, and once established the military should further debate about theatre commands.

I agree with IAFs contention on not tying down air assets to theatres.



Well there is an argument that a CDS would create an all powerful General. One of the checks in practice in other countries is to have theatre commands where the commanders directly report to the civilian leadership . In our case resources are limited and cant be tied down to theatres. An alternate solution needs to be found but a CDS is imperative.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Aditya G » 07 Nov 2017 00:49

The current version of the CDS is the PCCOSC, which doesn't really create an all powerful general. It does however create a single point command and advise for all triservice commands. It would have been useful to create the office first, and let that channel the creation of the other triservice agencies/commands.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 01 Dec 2017 06:58

A blast from the past.

GB reforms before WWI.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esher_Report

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 08 Jan 2018 09:06


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 03 Feb 2018 02:49

A short note on history of British Army organization. I think.would be useful to understand the IA ethos.

http://nigelef.tripod.com/higherorg.htm

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 374
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby jaysimha » 10 Feb 2018 12:06

Creation of Defence Chief Post

Creation of the post of Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) was recommended by Group of Ministers in 2001. A decision in this regard was to be taken after consultation with political parties. Subsequently, Naresh Chandra Task Force on National Security recommended creation of the post of Permanent Chairman Chief of Staff Committee in 2012. Both the proposals are simultaneously under consideration of the Government.

Creation of appropriate military command structures is a complex exercise involving operational, technical, logistical and financial aspects, and is reviewed from time to time. Appropriate measures are being taken from time to time to ensure inter-operability between the Services including through joint training and exercises.

This information was given by RakshaRajyaMantriDr.SubhashBhamrein a written reply to Dr. Manoj Rajoria and ShrimatiRiti Pathakin LokSabha today.

NAo/Nampi/Rajib/HS


(Release ID :176297)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby ramana » 18 Feb 2018 04:43

Arjun Subramaniam on IAF theater commands

https://twitter.com/rhinohistorian/stat ... 0851344384

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18847
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: CDS, Tri-Services Issues & Integration Debate

Postby Philip » 18 Feb 2018 09:48

One more 4 * honcho to head the CDS planned with direct access to the PMO.Then what happens to each chief's access to the PMO? They become second class chiefs.Each chief must have direct access to the PMO not requiring the Def.Sec's permission.As a courtesy he can inform the Def.Sec. for the record. Babudom is increasing even in the services manifold .Look at the number of starred top brass doing less work than their predecessors who were only one-star officers.The DNO of the entire naval ops in '71 was a Commodore! We seem to be replicating the US style of administration in the IN.

The VCs are usually responsible for all ops.Therefore it would be best to have below the current Chairman of the CoS committee, which is rotated amongst the three chiefs, a 3* officer responsible for combined ops . Equiv. to a vice-chief in rank/status.He would be assisted by the vice-chiefs.If theatre commands are introduced, then each command to be headed by a 3* officer.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashok Sarraff, bijeet, Google [Bot], kapio, madhu, Rakesh and 53 guests