Indian Army: News & Discussion

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 13 Jan 2012 23:57

I think the actions wont be full blown war but quick, sharp and humiliating punishment before drawing back. No need to hold the territory , only to inflict disproportional amount of damages,denting Paki H&D.
In one week , if Paki infrastructure worth 40-50 Billion is sent to oblivion, they will not recover for long and if 3.5 pays for it , Paki will outprice themselves from HO market and loose customers. IMHO, The game wont go more than 2 rounds and finish the current equation in so called South Asia for good.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 14 Jan 2012 00:22

Welcome to the 20th century. It has a muzzle reference system. Cancel the FMBT.

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 14 Jan 2012 13:06

A very well written article with much more than a semblance of truth. It should stoke the reform that is needed in the promotion system in Army. The sooner the better...

http://business-standard.com/india/news ... en/461720/

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 14 Jan 2012 19:56

nelson wrote:A very well written article with much more than a semblance of truth. It should stoke the reform that is needed in the promotion system in Army. The sooner the better... http://business-standard.com/india/news ... en/461720/

Over last thirty years, India has mainly been engaged in low-intensity conflicts -- primarily infantry type engagements, sometimes artillery, and very rarely mechanized forces. With overt nuclear-weaponization of the subcontinent and continued threat of cross-border militancy, this trend is going to continue. The other big threat that keeps popping on-and-off the radar is China, where terrain necessarily makes it an infantry+artillery dominated land front. What this means is that the officers from these arms will have more operational experience, hence greater claim on leadership and more relevant solutions that the higher-level decision-makers can use.

Infantry colonels are indeed better suited to command COIN light-infantry forces like the RR and the AR. I have spoken with Armor and Artillery officers who were deputed to RR or had their juniors deputed to RR -- they don't like it at all, the Armor officers are especially vocal about it. The junior officers adapt quickly and often become good platoon and column commanders; but mid-ranking officers have trouble adapting. If officers from other arms want to command these units, they must at least have commanded a company/column in a previous rotation and spent a tour on the battalion staff beforehand.

Per my understanding of combat arms and combat-support arms, the artillery is indeed a combat arm. The fact that they lob their shells from tens of kilometers away from the enemy has nothing to do with it; it is the fact that their mission is to engage the enemy that makes them a combat arm. Combat engineers, by contrast, are not tasked to engage the enemy (though they often end up doing so in course of their actual missions). The distinction between artillery and armor/infantry is that, the first is a fire-asset while the other two are maneuver assets; all three are combat arms in land forces. If the sappers/combat-engineers are getting gypped because of some institutional bias, that is bad and must be corrected.

saadhak · Post by **saadhak** » 14 Jan 2012 19:57

New General in race as chief mulls options

In a new twist to the next army chief race, western command chief Lt General Shankar Ghosh, the senior most army commander, got his medical category upgraded. Last year, his medical category was downgraded due to osteoarthritis, which kept him out of the race for the next army chief.
“If in case, General Singh resigns then Lt.General Ghosh will succeed. He is the senior most among the eight Army commanders rank officers. He has got medical clearance to be fit to perform any duty,” said a senior army officer.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Jan 2012 20:20

No axe to grind with the good chief,but ignorance of the law is no excuse.Let me give you an example.I recd. my new PAN card from the IT dept.but immediately noticed that my father's initials were wrong.I returned the card immediately and have now recd. a new one.There is massive confusion with "family cards"/"ration cards",the ultimate proof of one's residence,etc. when applying for a passport.Vernacular spelling of one's name can ruin a person's life as I know of one pal,who has spent over a decade trying to fix his name spelt wrong on his family card,driver's licence,voters ID and others,which has prevented him from obtaining a passport and travelling overseas.

If there was a mistake,it was Gen. Singh's responsibility to bring it to the notice of the Army authorities a long time ago and if he can prove that he did so, long before he became chief,the benefit of the doubt must be given to him.If he did so only recently,then the "rub of the green" applies to him and he should gracefully accept whatever the MOD decides and accept that it was his mistake too.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 14 Jan 2012 22:49

This incident only reinforces my visceral contempt for govt. bureaucracy and the reflex worship of documents and "precedent" that goes with it. This is not a complex problem or a controversial one. Getting to the truth should take a person of average intelligence very little time. Human laws are just that human made. They can always be changed. It seems that that the babuuns and their parasitic political masters have basically issued an edict and are stunned someone has the temerityto tell these self proclaimed emperors they are wearing no clothes.

India has no worse enemy than its own govt. (essentially the Kangress party). All its woes can be traced to this one despicable entity.

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 14 Jan 2012 23:54

ParGha wrote:
nelson wrote:A very well written article with much more than a semblance of truth. It should stoke the reform that is needed in the promotion system in Army. The sooner the better... http://business-standard.com/india/news ... en/461720/
Over last thirty years, India has mainly been engaged in low-intensity conflicts -- primarily infantry type engagements, sometimes artillery, and very rarely mechanized forces. With overt nuclear-weaponization of the subcontinent and continued threat of cross-border militancy, this trend is going to continue.

I agree that LICO has been the main-stay and will continue to be so in the near future. But that should not distract the Army of its necessity and ability to counter the adversary or launch its own grand scheme.

The other big threat that keeps popping on-and-off the radar is China, where terrain necessarily makes it an infantry+artillery dominated land front. What this means is that the officers from these arms will have more operational experience, hence greater claim on leadership and more relevant solutions that the higher-level decision-makers can use.

The fear is that with a prolonged strangulation, the middle ranking officers who are meritorious otherwise will be forced to quit the race on the premise that the system has been unjust to them. If what you say is the truth or actual reason it should be announced as a policy rather than being implemented hideously.

Infantry colonels are indeed better suited to command COIN light-infantry forces like the RR and the AR. I have spoken with Armor and Artillery officers who were deputed to RR or had their juniors deputed to RR -- they don't like it at all, the Armor officers are especially vocal about it.

It is mandatory for officers of combat/ combat support arms to do a tenure in AR/RR in order to be eligible for command appointments in their own arm. Col Shukla also points it out in his article that officers from other arms perform equally well in their AR/RR tenor , at the level of company commanders or below.

The junior officers adapt quickly and often become good platoon and column commanders; but mid-ranking officers have trouble adapting. If officers from other arms want to command these units, they must at least have commanded a company/column in a previous rotation and spent a tour on the battalion staff beforehand.

Col Shukla also brings out that the same officers who have done tenure in AR/RR are being denied command of AR/RR battalions at the time of their promotion to rank of Col and this can be accepted to be true more often than not. This is achieved by the so called pro rata basis vacancies and then counting the entire vacancies of Col in AR/RR to be that of infantry.

Per my understanding of combat arms and combat-support arms, the artillery is indeed a combat arm. The fact that they lob their shells from tens of kilometers away from the enemy has nothing to do with it; it is the fact that their mission is to engage the enemy that makes them a combat arm. Combat engineers, by contrast, are not tasked to engage the enemy (though they often end up doing so in course of their actual missions). .... If the sappers/combat-engineers are getting gypped because of some institutional bias, that is bad and must be corrected.

It is also not my claim that artillery is not a combat arm and combat-engineers are one. That is just another viewpoint that Col Shukla alludes to and is open to debate, maybe at a different time.

At the end, the fact is that there is a general feeling that officers from certain arms are being shortchanged, right in the middle of their service.
Firstly, that chiefs from infantry and artillery have been unjust to those from other arms and services in that they have two and half year promotion gap between infantry/artillery and armour/ mechanised infantry/ supporting arms. Officers in the services languish four years behind.
Secondly, we have nearly 60% promotions to the rank of Col in infantry/ artillery and just about 25%-35% in other arms and services .
Thirdly, that this head-start and healthy promotion percentage afforded to certain arms will have a large say in determining the future chief and army commanders.
Lastly, that the above will constitute a vicious circle.

All this at the cost of merit. So, there is a requirement to correct the situation and its course. In the long run, as it has happened in the past, the system is self correcting and tides will turn to try and achieve a balance. However the immediate and apparent damage is avoidable.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Jan 2012 00:02

Ktichener was an Engineering officer. In the 1971 war there was a brigade led by a Signals officer which performed very well. The surrendering Paki guy exclaimed that in their army that officer would have been in charge of repairing radios or some such thing.

I think the babuization of Indian Army has led to the distortion of considering the personnel as specialists first and then as soldiers instead of the otherway around.
For the good of the country the Mil Secy branch has to be re-organized.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Jan 2012 00:05

pandyan wrote:^^^

.......
So, why did they force a new DOB on the general? Why did this happen? Who did this?

I blame the babuization of the upper echelons of Ind Army officer cadre. The many careers ruined in military and even IAS due to the Confidential Report written by petty senior officers is quite large.

Most likely some petty senior decided to fix VKS and forced the DOB charade.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 15 Jan 2012 00:55

Because some monkey mistakenly writes a 0 instead of a 1 on a document, a man who has sacrificed and dedicated his life to his country (rather than raping and looting it like Kangrss Inc.-Gandhi pvt. limited) should step down? The unbearable arrogance ( a trait I often see in the most incompetent and useless of people) of the people asking the Chief to step down makes my blood boil. A country which treats its military so shamelessly can never aspire to greatness.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Jan 2012 03:49

You see this even here.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 15 Jan 2012 08:34

Army Day Coverage (9 Pages)

Govt has full confidence in you: Antony to Army chief

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 15 Jan 2012 11:02

Philip wrote:No axe to grind with the good chief,but ignorance of the law is no excuse.Let me give you an example.I recd. my new PAN card from the IT dept.but immediately noticed that my father's initials were wrong.I returned the card immediately and have now recd. a new one.There is massive confusion with "family cards"/"ration cards",the ultimate proof of one's residence,etc. when applying for a passport.Vernacular spelling of one's name can ruin a person's life as I know of one pal,who has spent over a decade trying to fix his name spelt wrong on his family card,driver's licence,voters ID and others,which has prevented him from obtaining a passport and travelling overseas.

If there was a mistake,it was Gen. Singh's responsibility to bring it to the notice of the Army authorities a long time ago and if he can prove that he did so, long before he became chief,the benefit of the doubt must be given to him.If he did so only recently,then the "rub of the green" applies to him and he should gracefully accept whatever the MOD decides and accept that it was his mistake too.

And how do you explain the fact that all his promotions were based on 1951.All documents are showing 1951. He has been asked by UPSC( based on News reports) to clarify his 1950 and in response he had sent his Matric certificate showing 1951 and was accepted by UPSC.This was way back in 1966. If he was ineligible by DOB 1951 UPSC would have rejected his application then. If he were ineligible for appointment , initially, by DOB 1951 even now that case can be thrown out easily as that is one condition for accepting or rejecting the correction.

The Good general had no way of knowing if MS had not maintained his correct DOB since all records till 2006 reflected 1951. MS Gen Nair's letter makes it amply clear unless it is a forgery then that is a serious offense. And when it was first brought up and AG branch asked to reconcile, why MS did not reconcile and made one DOB. Then again how does one explain the fact that Law Ministry's opinion was no taken and Mr Vahanavati had to give a cooked up advice just like he did in 2G case and had to resign.

The responsibility to correct the mistake is by those who make it i.e. MS branch or MOD. They can no put a condition o accept something to take promotions. He did not accept it unconditionally and he mentions " as directed by " and that was in 2005 which does not qualify to be recent. . And if MOD has some more records which they think would support their decision they should make it public and not act like martyrs, no one is convinced.

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 15 Jan 2012 13:57

Gen(retd) V P Malik's take, on factors affecting the Army.
http://www.asianage.com/interview-week/ ... ageing-622

He favours division sized 'Combat Command' rather than a 'Mountain Strike Corps' against China. His idea looks quite appealing.
He also disfavours centralising all 3 strike corps under one Command. Well this has its own pros and cons.
Lastly, his views on measures to make the career in AFs attractive. Dot on target.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 15 Jan 2012 18:20

A comment posted in reply to Ajai Shukla's article on promotoin issues in the IA:

Dear Col Ajay,

Your heartburn is understandable, you were in Armoured Corps. All along, AC guys were having a good time due to regimental patronage system. AC (earlier cav), since the days of silladari system was dominated by feudal types, which continued well after independence. Since Arty/engrs officership required studies, which you feudals could not, commoners were grudgingly taken as officer in these corps, but treated step-motherly by your system of patronage. Now that shoe is on other foot, it bites.
Who created Mandalisation. AC generals started it by creating a sub caste within caste, Combat Sp Arm and Combat Arm. Earlier, Arty was an arm, you guys threw it out.

Now, is distance from enemy the only criteria for determining whether a corps is an arm or otherwise? With that logic, IAF should be tfr to MHA. Just count number of gallantry awards and you wll know how far Arty is from enemy. Wars are won by killing enemy, not by getting proximate to him.

If you are a soldier, you will publish this. Otherwise, we are better without you

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 15 Jan 2012 18:29

saadhak wrote:New General in race as chief mulls options
In a new twist to the next army chief race, western command chief Lt General Shankar Ghosh, the senior most army commander, got his medical category upgraded. Last year, his medical category was downgraded due to osteoarthritis, which kept him out of the race for the next army chief.
“If in case, General Singh resigns then Lt.General Ghosh will succeed. He is the senior most among the eight Army commanders rank officers. He has got medical clearance to be fit to perform any duty,” said a senior army officer.

Ha, ha, ha. Kya joke hai. Downgrade at will and upgrade at will.

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 15 Jan 2012 19:11

rohitvats wrote:A comment posted in reply to Ajai Shukla's article on promotoin issues in the IA:

Dear Col Ajay,

Your heartburn is understandable, you were in Armoured Corps. All along, AC guys were having a good time due to regimental patronage system. AC (earlier cav), since the days of silladari system was dominated by feudal types, which continued well after independence. Since Arty/engrs officership required studies, which you feudals could not, commoners were grudgingly taken as officer in these corps, but treated step-motherly by your system of patronage. Now that shoe is on other foot, it bites.
Who created Mandalisation. AC generals started it by creating a sub caste within caste, Combat Sp Arm and Combat Arm. Earlier, Arty was an arm, you guys threw it out.

Now, is distance from enemy the only criteria for determining whether a corps is an arm or otherwise? With that logic, IAF should be tfr to MHA. Just count number of gallantry awards and you wll know how far Arty is from enemy. Wars are won by killing enemy, not by getting proximate to him.

If you are a soldier, you will publish this. Otherwise, we are better without you

Exactly the kind of animousity that we would not like amongst brother officers from different arms of the same Army. there is no marks for guessing who the ultimate loser is.

http://www.jottings.in/2009/07/from-tod ... ul-09.html
Click link and scroll down to Article from The Tribune.
An article from Tribune dating back to 2009 explains the issue at its adolescence. This is being allowed to grow, to the detriment of the entire Army. Some parts of the article by Col Shukla and comments that it has invited are pointers to this deterioration.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 15 Jan 2012 20:47

VinayG wrote:time to get that lunatic FM out of his post for god sake why even defense deals would have to get clearance from FM if the DM himself have approved it , or does the FM is in dreamland thinking that the lizard will wag his tall and our armed forces will will need to fight wars with stick and stones. i just cant bloody believe it that pathetic jack a$$ FM had asked such a question

no threat from China

JAMMU: A top Army Commander on Sunday said he sees no threat from China and there is no reason for any alarm as the situation along the Sino-Indian border in Ladakh sector is calm.

"The situation remains calm (along the Line of Actual Control in Ladakh sector). There is no threat from China," General Officer Commanding-In-Chief, Northern Command, Lt Gen K T Parnaik, said.

....
....

What we have on the LAC is transgressions. There are transgressions which have taken place in 2011, which have followed the routine pattern of previous years with some minor changes," Lt Gen Parnaik said.

"The confidence-building measures are in place. Hence, the situation is very much under control," he said adding Army and ITBP personnel were carrying out surveillance along the border.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 15 Jan 2012 20:55

Does this means no raising of new mountain division

No sanctioning of money by MoF

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 15 Jan 2012 21:04

The enemy ravaging the Indian Army? Age!

The profession demands a younger profile, whereas due to the narrow pyramid of promotional avenues, the age profile in various command assignments continues to soar upwards, notwithstanding the Ajai Vikram Singh Committee report. There are now six to seven Lieutenant Colonels / Colonels in a major unit. If we continue in the same manner, we will end up very soon having units commanded by Brigadiers. Instead of addressing the core issues, we try to push the main problem under the carpet.

Quoting Central Police Organisations (CPOs), Central Para Military Forces (CPMF), State Police Force or State Armed Police, example of having a top-heavy rank structure is not going to solve the problem of an ageing profile of the Defence Forces in any way. The aim of this very exercise is not achieved, as there has been a marginal reduction in age profile in command assignments. Even the life expectancy in our country continues to soar upwards, further compounding and complicating the problem. The trend, therefore, is to keep increasing the average age up the ladder with a view to give employment till as late in life as is possible. On the face of it, it looks good but it militates against the needs of the job content.

This issue has been repeatedly raised in many a fora but to no avail. We don't have the will and the desire to address contentious issues; we have the enemy within. We don't have to wait for our adversaries to cut us to size by throwing up most experienced but older defence personnel.

Instead of tackling the basic problem on a long-term basis, we end up carrying out up gradations giving temporary relief. This has resulted in an upside down pyramid, which means chaos and instability. The working hands or the functional cadre is shrinking every day. Sanctity attached to a particular rank has been eroded so much that it has not only lost its charm but at times is demeaning. Some monetary benefits have accrued, but at the cost of depleting efficiency and counter-productive work culture.

Recent recommendations given by the Ajai Vikram Singh Committee have certainly assuaged the',-sentiments of the Defence Forces personnel. But how long will this euphoria of rank upgradations last? The top will become so heavy that the organisation will crumble under its own weight. From time immemorial, Captains, Majors and Colonels (and their equivalents in the Indian Navy and Indian Air Force) had an aura attached to them and they commanded a certain authority, which has been diluted to a great extent. This is amply evident from the current rank structure of having six to seven 'Bagga' Colonels/Lieutenant Colonels in an Infantry Battalion / Artillery Regiment/Armoured Regiment (These are the basic fighting units and cutting edge of the Indian Army). Have these upgradations really solved the ageing profile? Temporarily yes, the age of a Commanding Officer may have been brought down to 38-39 years from the erstwhile 40-41 years. Still far from the desirable, if he has to lead from the front. The age of a Commanding Officer needs to be brought down to 34-35 years.

In the next step you will have to give hundreds of additional appointments of Brigadiers and Generals to maintain upward mobility. Ultimately,the jobs which were earlier being done by Captains/Majors shall be done by Colonels/Brigadiers and jobs being done by Colonels/Brigadiers would be done by Major Generals/Lieutenant Generals. This is applicable in a similar way to the other sister services. What are we heading for? A Welfare Armed Force or a Combat fit Armed Force? In our country, we are known for fire-fighting actions in which we are very proficient and, efficient. We either don't take serious measures and steps to anticipate or prevent the fire, nor seriously take up the follow-up activity to its logical conclusion. Most of our actions are personality oriented and lack continuity. Invariably we lose sight of our needs and requirements.

The Defence Forces are seized with the problem and some very brilliant and pragmatic studies have been undertaken and most workable solutions have been given. The decision-makers have always brushed these solutions under the carpet. This action by them is certainly not for economic reasons but they feel threatened, as their authority and functioning ethos may be challenged and questioned because of the very nature and the character of the Defence Forces personnel. The bane of this problem is not lack of solutions but the 'will' to accept workable options.

Post 1962, the Defence Forces have been continuously undergoing trimming exercises as well as all organisations have been made leaner and meaner. The teeth to tail ratio has been continuously pruned down and superfluous flab removed. However, stagnation continued as no concrete steps were accepted by the Government to absorb highly trained manpower laterally or elsewhere with statutory support. Up service has not yielded results.

Today the Defence Forces personnel are best trained in a host of disciplines viz. organisational acumen, human resource management, human resource development, material and resources management, inventory control, financial management including funds control, security scenario management, event management, environment management, automotive management, administration, marketing, and so on. In addition, the Defence Forces have a vast potential in IT and technical manpower. A line about our marketing capability i.e., we are able to sell a concept to our men who gets so motivated, committed and convinced that he is prepared to give his life for his 'leaders'.

Having worked in the private sector for almost two years, it is revealing and painful to see that the best-trained and disciplined manpower being wasted in our country. Personnel of Defence Forces, who are wasted out at a very young age, are left to fade into oblivion when they still have a lot of flame and energy. A gross national waste and neglect!

This problem is more attitudinal in nature, and needs to be changed. When you talk to people in the public domain (public sector) and corporate world, they very well realise the capabilities of Defence Personnel but do not want to acknowledge, as the feel threatened. They are neither interested in productivity nor in enhancing national output. They feel insecure due to reasons best known to them.

Notwithstanding the above, an attitudinal change will prevent criminal waste of this highly trained and potent national resource (manpower), which needs to be harnessed to increase national productivity. Discipline and grooming in an organisation, which is over 350 years old, can invigorate not only the public sector and private sector but also improve governance, which is so very badly needed by our country.

Proper and timely utilisation of this highly accomplished manpower will not only meet the peculiar service conditions on account of lateral induction, while in service and on superannuating as well. If utilised, they can contribute immensely towards nation building. This very live and acute problem can be addressed by lateral absorption and lateral adjustment. This can be achieved by not only societal obligations towards the saviours of our nation but by certain statutory provisions enforced by our government through legislation.

Short Service Commission (SSC), is one measure to improve promotional aspects. Therefore, this avenue needs to be made more lucrative as had been done earlier. Age relaxation and certain concessions as were offered earlier I.e., exemption of one paper should be restored for the entrance exam of lAS, IPS, IFS and other allied services. Similarly, all other public sector organisations and undertakings, including railways, to give certain concessions for smooth career transition. Special courses for career transition should be conducted for all SSC officers under the aegis of the Director General Resettlement, as also for all other officers when they are due for their next rank. Institutions like Grand Career Transition Centre, New Delhi have done yeoman service. More such institutions should be encouraged.

While discussing with potential employers, it emerges that they are sensitive to getting rejected material from the Defence Forces. The term 'rejection' has since been discarded by the Armed Forces and it is now 'empanelment' for future promotion based on vacancies. Whether you use the word 'rejection' or 'empanelment' the stigma continues to be attached. This problem can be very convincingly solved by empanelling say 110 officers against 100 vacancies and then offering headless list of 110 officers to prospective employers with star rating for some officers who can be better utilised in the Defence Services. This is a matter of detail which can be resolved by mutual discussions and understanding. Sidestepping to start with should be on deputation. On completion of tenure, an offer should be made for permanent seconded or permanent absorption. This proposal is not free of attendant problems but over a period of time they can be overcome.

Lateral movement should be planned not only for SSC officers but also for permanent commissioned officers at Major to Lieutenant Colonel, Lieutenant Colonel to Colonel, Colonel to Brigadier and Brigadier to Major General levels, and equivalent rank structures in the Indian Navy and the Indian Air Force with 'seniority protected'. Low Medical Category officers, by virtue of condition of service, may not be most suitable for Defence Services but could well be absorbed in civil set up profitably.

The government should also bring out legislation to earmark a reasonable number of vacancies in all public and private sector undertakings for the serving and superannuated defence personnel. This single measure will inject discipline and a productive work culture into any type of organisation, which is very much a need in our country to be a Japan' or a 'Germany'. The normal wastage rate of approximately 80,000 personnel annually can be judiciously utilised by harnessing their tremendous potential. This will greatly assuage the feelings of otherwise traumatized retiring defence personnel who start fading from the age of 35 for a sepoy, 45-50 for a J~O and 52 years onwards for an officer.

Our country is going through the transitory stages of a budding democracy, which provides an ideal breeding ground for certain fissiparous tendencies to grow. For countering external threats, we certainly require strong Armed Forces but for maintaining internal security, we require highly motivated and trained SPF, CPOs and CPMF. There cannot be a much better trained and disciplined force than the Armed Forces personnel. Again, there is an attitudinal problem to accept personnel from the Armed Forces or perhaps insecurity because of rampant corruption? There is no reason why the earlier trend should not be restored. Vacancies need to be set aside in all SPF, CPOs and CPMF for the retired and serving defence personal with 'seniority protected' and no restriction on promotional aspects. These measures will not only give the much needed younger profile to our Defence Forces but will also greatly enhance the fighting potential of our SPF, CPOs and CPMF for maintenance of normal law and order. These forces will also be able to effectively neutralise the growing menace of Insurgencies, Naxalism and Maoist activities and so on, which divert much-needed national resources from development purposes.

The measures suggested above are neither all-encompassing nor new but they need to be addressed with compassion and urgency to be able to surge ahead towards a logical conclusion. There is no point in appointing high power committees and then implementing little.

The buzzword, therefore, is 'lateral induction' for a 'better tomorrow'. The Indian Armed Forces with a younger profile will be able to meet the security challenges in a better manner so that the taxpayer gets a fair deal. At the same time, the need to harness such a vast potential of superannuating personnel which otherwise is going waste will be utilised for nation building.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Jan 2012 21:51

300 terrorists waiting to sneak into J & K : GOC Northern Command

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 15 Jan 2012 22:53

Cash Crunch Hits Defence Shopping
Looks like we may not be able to finance the Mountain Strike Corps. Looks this fiscal deficit thing is seriously hampering our security plans..
The ripple effects of stashing of black money, I believe..

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 16 Jan 2012 03:00

^^

Cash crunch is happening because its election time, and all public funds must be diverted to election promises, eg Food Security Bill, NREGA, Free bijli paani, et al.

But in reality there is no cash crunch.

The finmin is just throwing its weight around. Their query is: "Will China threat last another 2 years"?

Apparently, they have never heard of the 62 war, and the fifty year old yellow menace. Idiots.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 16 Jan 2012 03:45

Nuclear weapons only for strategic deterrence: Army chief

:
:
"Let's be quite clear on it... Nuclear weapons are not for war-fighting. They have got a strategic significance and that is where it should end," said Army chief General V K Singh, speaking on the sidelines of the 64th Army Day on Sunday.
:
:
"A lot has changed since the days of Op Parakram. If we did something in 15 days then, we can do it in seven days now. After two years, we may be able to do it in three days," Gen Singh said.

In other words, the Army's three "strike" corps -- 1 Corps (Mathura), 2 Corps (Ambala) and 21 Corps (Bhopal), each with their three to four self-contained, highly-mobile "battle groups" centered around T-90S and T-72 M1 tanks - can now be ready at their border launch points within a week of the government directive.

The Army is now working towards further cutting down this mobilization timeframe to 72 to 96 hours, even as its 10 "pivot corps" undergo "structural changes", operational logistics are reorganized and "theatrisation of combat support" tested.

Gen Singh did admit the Army was fine-tuning its "Pro-Active Strategy", sometimes dubbed the "Cold Start" doctrine, to achieve desired politico-military results. The unstated aim is to punish Pakistan in a limited manner, not invade or occupy its territory, in the event of a terror strike.

The strategy to launch multiple blitzkrieg thrusts across the border, tested in two major exercises Vijayee Bhava and Sudarshan Shakti last year, has certainly got Pakistan worried.

Having already boosted its nuclear arsenal to around 90-110 warheads, compared to India's 80-100, Pakistan has also taken to projecting its 60-km Nasr (Hatf-IX) nuclear missile as a fitting riposte to thwart any such Indian move.

But while India has a declared commitment of "no first-use", its nuclear doctrine does hold that "nuclear retaliation to a first strike will be massive and designed to inflict unacceptable damage". India even retains the option to retaliate with nuclear weapons if its forces "anywhere" are attacked with biological or chemical weapons.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 16 Jan 2012 08:06

FM assures Army on funds to create new Strike Corps

Finance minister Pranab Mukherjee has assured army chief General VK Singh that fiscal go-ahead for creation of a new strike corps based at Pannagarh and bolstering up of defence along the 4,057 kilometre Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China will soon be accorded so that the vital matter is taken up for approval by the Cabinet Committee for Security (CCS).
Mukherjee gave this verbal commitment when General Singh called on the finance minister after his return from Myanmar on January 9, and requested him for speedy expedition of the force and weapon accretion process so that orders could be issued for recruitment and raising two more divisions for proposed Pannagarh Corps.

Singh has met Mukherjee thrice on this issue and has written at least once to the Finance Ministry after the latter raised sundry questions on the Indian Army's threat assessment on China owing to significant financial implications involved.

Defence minister AK Antony on his part is confident that the matter would be taken up by the CCS in 2011-2012 financial year and the fiscal impact would be spread over next five years.

While China has resurrected a lean and mean PLA machine with world class infrastructure along the LAC, India is still struggling to improve its road infrastructure and force capability.

However, the Indian Army is struggling for the UPA government support to raise Pannagarh Corps, two armoured brigades in Sikkim (near Nathu La) and Ladakh (Chusul), and an additional infantry brigade in Barahoti plains in the middle sector.

The latest objections have been raised by deputy national security advisor Lt Gen (Retd) Prakash Menon, {So not all blame should go to the babus/UPA as was suggested last week on BRF} who has suggested that force accretion and resources should be equally distributed among the three services rather than only focus on the Army.

Gen Menon is learnt to be partial to India enhancing its naval capabilities to tackle China as the latter has in fact reduced number of troops in Tibet by using rapid deployment formations and has beefed up PLA Navy.

The Indian Army, on its part, has made it amply clear that it need force accretion as threat potential of a border flare-up with PLA is omnipresent till the boundary is finally demarcated by the two nations.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 16 Jan 2012 08:14

The latest objections have been raised by deputy national security advisor Lt Gen (Retd) Prakash Menon, {So not all blame should go to the babus/UPA as was suggested last week on BRF} who has suggested that force accretion and resources should be equally distributed among the three services rather than only focus on the Army.

Now what can I say

The issue is raising new mountain strike corps and allotting proper funds for it. Why Mr. Menon is suggesting this is beyond my comprehension and understanding.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 16 Jan 2012 08:46

well I might agree with Menon

I would rather make sure the exsiting forces are beefed up with arty etc. So more arty, more helos and more EW equipment for the army is a better option.

The Navy is where we have the ability to overmatch so might be a good idea to focus ont hat especially subs.

There is no point in more soldiers if we cannot provide them with the right weapons.

IMO and all that

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 16 Jan 2012 09:11

Surya wrote:well I might agree with Menon

I would rather make sure the exsiting forces are beefed up with arty etc. So more arty, more helos and more EW equipment for the army is a better option.

The Navy is where we have the ability to overmatch so might be a good idea to focus ont hat especially subs.

There is no point in more soldiers if we cannot provide them with the right weapons.

IMO and all that

Well we can do both things, its not an either-or situation. The arty saga has been going on for decades now, with no end in sight, so other initiatives must not wait for it.

What Lt Gen Menon is overlooking is that the Mountain Strike Corps is just one Service's plan on force accretion. Similarly, the Air Force is adding more ALGs, MKI squadrons & C-17s in the East and the Navy, is adding P-17A/Bs, Arihants and the Brahmos. The Army is the one lagging behind the most for reasons unknown.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 16 Jan 2012 09:29

^^ exactly.

Its like saying why allot all the money in MMRCA deal, some of that should be utilized in IA and IN.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 16 Jan 2012 12:07

MOF would allot money in phases in the budget and not in one go, be it MMRCA or raising of mountain Strike corps. It would all depend on the terms of contract which would have to be approved by IFA in MOD and then by MOF. The outflow is paced during the total contract period.

Second point is that there is no question of equality in fund allotment. It is all need based, prioritized and forces' ability to spend money through due process.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 16 Jan 2012 12:10

Army ready to face any challenge:Gen Singh

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 16 Jan 2012 17:47

Gen V K Singh takes the govt to the court.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 16 Jan 2012 17:48

Thumbs up to VKS .

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 16 Jan 2012 17:56

chaanakya wrote:Thumbs up to VKS .

+108

This murder of Indian govt institutionsm and establishment by this horrid govt has gone on long enough.

After the CAG Mr Rai, now Gen V K Singh.

A few good men.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 16 Jan 2012 18:02

Sanku sir,
Could you please post a link for the news???

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 16 Jan 2012 18:04

Bala Vignesh wrote:Sanku sir,
Could you please post a link for the news???

Running live on TimesNow TV. Will post link as soon as on the web.

You can find a scrolling news on ToI site.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 16 Jan 2012 18:07

It is heartening to know that despite all guns at his disposal, Army Chief has faith in the institutions built by people of this country. Political dispensation in UPA was playing brinkmanship bending everything to suit their design.

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 16 Jan 2012 18:07

Army Chief takes govt to court over age row

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/army- ... eststories

Ok Boss... Bring it on...

Today I'll have an extra large scotch to good Gen's health!!

God Speed!!!

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 16 Jan 2012 18:13

chaanakya wrote:It is heartening to know that despite all guns at his disposal, Army Chief has faith in the institutions built by people of this country /ed.....

Some times just sometimes I feel if only once, just once one morning ppl like PC & MMS woke up to find tanks n their courtyard.....

I know... I know... "not feasible in a big country like ours; we are different from Pak; Thank god our Mil is professional; how will you draw a line; kneejerk, unthoughtful comment; irresponsible"

I know all these and more such arguements and I agree to all of them, but once, just once........