Image Courtesy: mynation.com

Tanvir Jaikishen

Member, Chennai Centre for China Studies (C3S)

S e p t e m b e r 1 9 2 0 1 9

C3S Issue Map IV

Building a Viable Indian Defense viz. China:

An Analysis of the Integrated Theatre

Commands

What is an Issue Map?

C3S has launched its Issue Map initiative. The reports under this series analyse the status and developments of current scenarios in detail. They attempt to aid the reader to get a more comprehensive idea of the issue being addressed through a detailed illustration in the form of images, data and facts

Issue Maps are available for download as PDFs.

About C3S

The Chennai Centre for China Studies (C3S), registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975 (83/2008 dated 4th April 2008), is a non-profit public policy think tank. We carry out in depth studies of developments relating to China with priority to issues of interest to India such as geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics of India- China relations, Chinas internal dynamics, border issues, Chinas relations with South Asian countries, prospects of trade, the evolution of Chinese politics and its impact on India and the world, ASEAN and SAARC relations, cultural links, etc. C3S attempts to provide a forum for dialogue with China scholars in India and abroad and give space for the expression of alternate opinions on China related topics. We also provide a database for research on China with special attention to information available in Chinese language. Additionally, events, lecture discussions and seminars are organised on topics of current interest.

About the Author

Tanvir Jaikishen is a consultant and entrepreneur. He holds a master's degree from the London School of Economics and Political Science in International Health Policy. His passions include the study of International Relations, Geopolitics, Defense and Greco- Roman history. He is Member, C3S.

Introduction

On the 15th of August, 2019, the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi announced the

creation of a Chief of Defense Staff (CDS) position [1]. The role of the CDS will be primarily

to coordinate between the three armed services - the Indian Army, Indian Navy and Indian

Air Force in order to ensure better synergy between the forces, streamlined procurement

and planning and improved operational readiness in case of future conflict. The

recommendation for the creation of the post of CDS has been made as early as 2001, by the

Group of Ministers (GoM) and its creation underscores a genuine desire to improve the

overall fighting capability of India’s armed forces *2+.

Over the last two decades, there has been increasing clamour towards re-organizing India’s

armed forces into Integrated Theatre Commands (ITCs) with each theatre command

responsible for a particular threat. Bureaucrats and defense personnel, both serving and

retired and defense analysts, among others have long called for the creation of ITCs, each

headed by a Commander who will be responsible ultimately to the CDS. This would enhance

the lethality and the agility of the Indian armed forces, enabling it to better fight both

localised conflicts as well as full-scale war on more than one front if needed.

There are several advantages in reorganizing the Indian Armed Forces into ITCs. Some of

these include

Better training of forces: ITCs can train forces based on the specific nature of the

threat and type of terrain

Streamlined Procurement and Budget Allocation: ITCs can request budgets after a

careful assessment of the type of equipment required basis the nature of threat and

type of terrain. ITCs can also be made responsible for their own procurements,

thereby shortening the acquisition and induction process of latest platforms.

Better synergy between platforms: A case can be made that in the modern military

context, terms like the “Army”, “Navy” and “Air Force” are outdated and any

attempt to wage war in a silo is impractical. An ITC would ensure integration of land,

naval and air assets under a unified command structure, enabling greater

interoperability between different land, sea and air platforms, thus improving the

odds of a favorable military outcome.

The question that remains is not whether the Indian armed forces must shift to ITCs but

how quickly and in what manor. Conventional wisdom would dictate that it would be

prudent to model the ITCs on similar lines as other western militaries, with accommodation

made for unique theatre specific requirements in the Indian context. However, the author

argues, that the Indian armed forces are currently not in a position to reorganize to ITCs, at

least in the conventional sense.

The Current Indian Armed Forces Command Structure: A Snapshot

The Indian Army has seven Commands, the Indian Navy has three Commands and the Indian

Air Force has seven Commands. The tables below list out the various Command locations

and headquarters.

Indian Army Commands[3]

Western Command Chandimandir

Northern Command Udhampur

South Western Command Jaipur

Central Command Lucknow

Eastern Command Kolkata

Army Training Command Shimla

Southern Command Pune

Indian Naval Commands[4]

Western Naval Command Mumbai

Eastern Naval Command Visakhapatnam

Southern Naval Command Cochin

Tri Service Command Port Blair

Indian Air Force Commands[5]

Western Air Command Delhi

South Western Air Command Gandhinagar

Central Air Command Allahabad

Eastern Air Command Shillong

Training Command Bengaluru

Southern Air Command Thiruvananthapuram

Maintenance Command Nagpur

Other[6]

Strategic Forces Command Commissioned in 2003

The responsibility for managing a conflict with China lies with the Northern, Central and

Eastern Army Commands. The Indian Air Force’s Central and Eastern Commands would

likewise assume responsibility for conflict with China. Should there be an outbreak of full-

scale war, the primary challenge will be to ensure coordination between the leadership of

the three army commands and two air force commands. A secondary challenge lies in the

fact that the Northern Command, located in Jammu & Kashmir holds a dual responsibility

for managing a conflict with Pakistan in the region. The Northern Command in Udhampur is

separated from the Eastern Command by a distance of over 2600 kilometers[7]. The warfare

of today is far more dynamic than the wars fought in the past and will require real time data

gathering, processing, analysis and action. In today’s battlefield environment, victory can

only be achieved through the ability to use large volumes of battlefield data in order to

make decisions in real time and execute battle plans accordingly. In such a scenario, having

three different Army commands, each with full autonomy and limited coordination will

render any advantage offered by data completely redundant.

India has fought four wars with Pakistan since her independence. Indian and Pakistani

troops continue to exchange fire across the Line of Control and as a result India has spent

the last 70 years developing the war plans against Pakistan which can be executed given

military preparedness and political will. The Pakistani military is conventionally weaker

when compared to the Indian military and hence it is entirely possible to manage a conflict

with Pakistan under existing command structures. India and China, have fought only one

war (1962) resulting in a military defeat for India, followed by a few skirmishes. China, which

has a larger military budget than India has a military force that is both qualitatively and

quantitatively superior. In 2019, India’s defense budget stands at United States Dollars USD

62 billion[8+ while China’s is estimated to be around USD 175 billion*9+. China has spent the

last three decades building the required infrastructure that will enable it to build up rapidly

and launch a large scale invasion of India in a short amount of time.

The PLA, despite having not fought a war since the Sino - Vietnam conflict of 1979, has

evolved into a modern fighting force that is capable of holding its own and arguably

prevailing against most Western militaries, including the United States. The PLA leadership

has constantly strived to restructure the armed forces to deal with evolving threats in line

with China’s growing geopolitical ambitions. The most dramatic change came about in 2016,

when the PLA restructured from 7 military regions to 5 Integrated Theatre Commands, with

each command being assigned a particular region or threat [10]. The next section will briefly

look at the five Chinese theatre commands in order to provide the reader with an

understanding of the current PLA military structure.

The People's Liberation Army Command Structure: A Snapshot

Image Courtesy: DW

The People’s Liberation Army of the People’s Republic of China is divided into five Theatre

Commands. The table below lists out the five commands and areas of responsibility by

Command.

Eastern Theatre Command[11] Headquartered in Nanjing and encompasses the areas of Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Anhui, Fujian, Jiangxi and the East Sea Fleet

Southern Theatre Command[12] Headquartered in Guangzhou and encompasses the areas of Guangdong, Guangxi, Hunan, Hong Kong and Macau

Western Theatre Command[13] Headquartered in Chengdu and encompasses the areas of Sichuan, Tibet, Giansu, Ningxia, Qinghai, Xinjiang and Chongqing

Northern Theatre Command[14] Headquartered in Shenyang and encompasses areas of Heilongjiang, Jilin, Liaoning, Shandong and Inner Mongolia

Central Theatre Command[15] Headquartered in Beijing and ecompases the areas of Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Shaanxi, Henan and Hubei

These five theatre commands or PLA Battle Zones have replaced the former seven military

area commands in Beijing, Nanjing, Chengdu, Ji'nan, Shenyang, Lanzhou and Guangzhou

from the 1st of February 2016. According to Defense Ministry spokesman Yang Yujun the

shift from MAC’s to Theatre Commands was made with a view to “improving the joint

operational commanding institutions, forming the joint operational system, better

safeguarding national sovereignty, security and development interests, and maintaining

regional stability and world peace.”[10]

The goal of each Theatre Command is to prepare for conflict in the respective areas of

responsibility. The Western Theatre Command has been set up to deal with future conflict

with India and as such merits a closer view in terms of manpower, platforms, equipment

and resources that have been allocated.

The Western Theatre Command comprises of the 76th Group Army, the 77th Group Army,

the Xinjiang Military District (Urumqi), The Xizang Military District (Tibet) and the Air

Forces.[16]

The 76th Group Army located in Xining comprises of the following forces

1 Special Operations Brigade

4 Armored Brigades

2 Infantry Brigades

1 Artillery Brigade

Engineering/NBC Brigade

1 Support Brigade

1 Helicopter Brigade

1 Air Defense Brigade

The 77th Group Army, located in Chongqing comprises of the following forces

1 Special Operations Brigade

2 Armored Brigades

4 Infantry Brigades

1 Artillery Brigade

1 Engineering/ Nuclear, Biological, Chemical (NBC) brigade

1 Support Brigade

1 Helicopter Brigade

1 Air Defense Brigade

The Xinjiang Military District comprises of the following forces

1 Special Operations Brigade

1 High Altitude Mechanised Division

3 High Altitude Motorized Divisions

1 Artillery Brigade

1 Air Defense Brigade

1 Engineering Regiment

1 Electronics Warfare Regiment

1 Helicopter Brigade

Xizang Military District comprises of the following forces

1 Special Operations Brigade

1 High Altitude Mechanised Infantry Brigade

2 Mountain Infantry Brigade

1 Artillery Regiment

1 Air Defense Brigade

1 Engineering Brigade

1 Electronics Warfare Regiment

The Air Forces of the Western Theatre Command comprise of the following divisions and

their corresponding platforms

4th Transport Division

1 Transport Regiment with Y-8/Y-9 aircraft

1 Transport Regiment with Y-7 aircraft

1 Transport Regiment with Y-7/ Y20 aircraft and Mi-17v5 Helicopters

6th and 33rd Fighter Divisions

2 Bomber Regiments with H-6K aircraft

1 Bomber Regiment with H-6H aircraft

Lanzhou Base

2 Fighter Brigades with J-11 aircraft

Urumqi Base

1 Fighter Brigade with J-8H aircraft

1 Fighter Brigade with J-11B aircraft

1 Attack Brigade with JH-7a aircraft

Xian Training Academy

Five training brigades with JL-8, Y-7 and Z-9 aircraft

Others

1 Survey Regiment with Y-8HI aircraft

1 Mixed Surface to Air Missile (SAM)/ Air Defense Artillery (ADA) Division

1 Mixed SAM/ADA Brigade

1 SAM Brigade

4 Independent SAM Regiments[16]

It is important to note here that China’s Western Theatre Command has been structured

and equipped based on the theatre specific requirement. In a future war with India, the

structuring and the resources allocated to the Western Theatre Command will enable it to

effectively manage the conflict without the need to seek resources and men from other

Commands. China’s military modernization and defense spending has allowed the country

to produce defense equipment of good quality as well as in large quantities to ensure that

each Theatre Command is self-sufficient.

The Indian Armed Forces currently lacks the manpower and the equipment (both

qualitatively and quantitatively) to create Integrated Theatre Commands that are self

sufficient. The next section will touch upon the proposed ITC structure for the Indian Armed

Forces and the fundamental roadblocks that prevent such a restructuring.

Independent Theatre Commands in the Indian Context

It has been opined that the 17 commands of the Indian Armed Forces be brought together

under three ITCs

The Northern Command that will assume overall responsibility for conflict with China

The Western Command that will assume overall responsibility for conflict with

Pakistan

The Southern Command that will assume responsibility for India’s maritime interests

While the integration into ITCs along the above lines is prudent from a certain standpoint,

the author argues that such a restructuring at least in the short term is unviable. Taking the

examples of the militaries of the United States of America and the People’s Republic of

China, currently the most powerful militaries in the world, the ability to successfully divide

their armed forces into ITCs is contingent on the availability of sufficient manpower,

equipment, platforms and a robust research and development base.

The Indian Armed Forces suffer from chronic manpower, equipment, platform, and funding

shortages across the three services. Current Research & Development (R&D) is still found

wanting and has resulted in India becoming the world’s second largest arms importer *17+.

The Indian Army currently faces a shortage of armor, artillery, armored personnel carriers,

night fighting capabilities, modern rifles, bulletproof jackets and ammunition among other

resources. The Indian Army unlike its western and Chinese counterparts remains a

manpower centric force as opposed to a platform centric force, thus placing a huge strain

on budgets which are typically allocated towards providing sustenance for, training of and

billeting troops instead of towards capital acquisitions.

The Indian Air Force has a sanctioned strength of 42 fighter squadrons which is considered

the minimum requirement in the event of an all out two front war. Currently the IAF possess

around 31 squadrons and is only expected to reach the sanctioned strength of 42 by

2035[18]. The Air Force is made up of primarily vintage fighter aircraft notably the MiG-21,

Mirage - 2000, Jaguar, and Mig-27 aircraft. Plans for a fifth generation fighter aircraft remain

on the drawing board for the immediate future and induction of large numbers of fourth

generation fighter aircraft is expected to take around a decade.

Rafale Fighter Jet

Image Courtesy: defensenew.com

Latest generation platforms like the Rafale fighter aircraft and the Apache AH-64E attack

helicopters currently being inducted are being placed in equal numbers in air bases near

China and Pakistan. While this allocation may be prudent during peacetime, should future

conflicts arise with either one or both of India’s neighbours, it is likely that air assets may be

moved to different air bases in another theatre of conflict, based on the severity of threat

and given the lack of significant numbers of fighter aircraft to sustain a single theatre

without the need for additional support.

The Indian Navy which has made significant strides towards indigenisation of platforms and

their respective components aims to possess 200 modern ships by 2027.[19] The Naval Air

Arm, boosted by the recent acquisitions of MiG-29s and Poseidon surveillance aircraft, still

lacks modern multi-role helicopters and anti submarine warfare helicopters. The Indian

Navy’s submarine fleet remains depleted due to poor planning, delayed production

timelines.

The Indian Armed Forces currently does not possess the bandwidth to allocate limited air

and naval platforms to one particular theatre of conflict. In the event of a localised conflict

on one front, it is possible to allocate dedicated air and naval platforms to ensure a decisive

victory, but in the case of an all out war situation in one or both fronts, resources will need

to be allocated based on area of requirement and urgency of need. An argument can also be

made that air and naval platforms need to remain theatre agnostic in order to ensure

judicious usage. For example, an Israeli made Phalcon airborne early warning and control

system (AEW&C) can be equally effective in conducting surveillance on both the Pakistani

and Chinese borders without necessarily being allocated to one specific theatre. Likewise

fighter and bomber aircraft can be equipped with countermeasures and weapons systems

that enable them to carry out offensive operations in both Chinese and Pakistani theatres.

Naval warships are developed keeping in mind the latest offensive, defensive, stealth and

propulsion technologies are not made with a view towards engaging Pakistani or Chinese

naval vessels only.

The same logic can be applied to punitive strike weapons like missiles and unmanned

combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs). These platforms must remain theatre agnostic with

deployment based in locations that will enable them to survive a first strike while ensuring

maximum lethality when launched. An example of such platforms includes BRAHMOS cruise

missiles. There are variants of this supersonic cruise missile and the deployment of each

variant is rightly based on functionality of variant type. While the Indian Army has already

inducted Block I and Block II BRAHMOS regiments, it is now in the process of inducting the

Block III “steep-dive” variant which can destroy targets behind mountain ranges.[20] The

army plans to base this regiment in the north-east of India, to counter China, but the same

missiles can also be placed in other theatres of operation that require steep dive capability.

A case can however be made for theatre specific planning and equipment/platform

procurement for the Indian Army. For example, a war with Pakistan would require adequate

numbers of artillery, T-90/T-72/Arjun tanks and weapons that can fire in over 50 degrees

Celsius of heat in Rajasthan to minus 50 degrees Celsius in Siachen. A war with Pakistan

would assume an offensive character and as such would require equipment and platforms

that support offensive action across the Line of Control and the International Border. A

conflict with Pakistan would require equipment that is suited to the deserts of Rajasthan,

the plains of Punjab and the high-altitude terrain of Kashmir. In contrast, a war with China

would be of a defensive nature and would require that soldiers be trained and acclimated to

high altitude warfare and equipped with gear that allows them to function in sub-zero

temperatures. Tanks and artillery has to be light and portable in order to be transported by

land or air to battle zones at high altitudes. There is also a need to ensure border road

construction projects are completed on time in order to ensure faster supply lines. The

overall goal of a conflict with China would be to ensure India’s territorial sovereignty is

maintained by repulsing Chinese assaults to behind the Line of Actual Control and the

International Border.

It is thus prudent to conclude that the creating ITCs along the lines of their western or even

Chinese counterparts is not practical given India’s unique threat assessments, geography,

and strategic requirements. What is also clear is that the current command structure and

structuring of forces is not optimal to fight a modern war. The next section will look at

current changes being made to the force structures of the Indian Army and how the

command structure of Indian Army can evolve in order to prevail decisively in a future

conflict.

Countering China: Creating New Command Structures to suit the Indian Context

The Indian Army seeks to move away from a Corps based structure towards Integrated

Battle Groups (IBGs). Each corps typically has three divisions and each division has three

brigades. IBGs are essentially brigade sized elements which comprises of infantry, armored,

artillery and air defense units.[24] IBGs will take only 12 to 48 hours to mobilize as opposed

to mobilization of an entire corps which can take days if not weeks based on existing

logistics. IBGs are constituted and equipped based on the three T’s which are threat, terrain

and task and thus each IBG will require different equipment, weapons, and platforms. IBGs

will also be offensive and defensive in nature with equipment, weapons and platforms being

once again different for offensive and defensive IBGs respectively. [21]

The current command structure must also evolve to make effective use of these new force

structures. A good case study is the Indian Navy’s Information Management and Analysis

Centre (IMAC) inaugurated in Gurgaon in 2014. The role of the IMAC is to collate and

process data from naval and coast guard stations, ships as well as merchant ships (through

automatic identification systems) in order to create a real-time live image of the 7500-

kilometer Indian coastline. [22]. While the army currently possesses the capability of real

time battlefield imaging, the author proposes that the Indian army create two Unified

Theatre Commands – one for managing conflict with China, the and the other with Pakistan.

Each of these Unified Commands will be responsible for collecting and processing data

specific to its theatre of conflict in order to create a real-time battlefield image. This will

allow more streamlined and efficient decision making in order to ensure a decisive victory in

a short span of time. This is important given that China has worked diligently to improve

mobilization time for the PLA through a network of roads near the border and development

of robust supply lines.

The author proposes that each of these Unified Theatre Commands be further divided into

sectors with a sub-command assigned to each sector. Currently, the ultimate responsibility

for managing conflict with China lies with the Northern, Central and Eastern Army

Commands. The author proposes these three existing commands be designated sector

commands with the following functions

- Capture, collate and transmit real time battlefield data to the Unified Theatre Command

- Work with newly formed IBGs to draw up battle plans and conduct exercises to validate

these plans

- Assess the evolving threat in each sector in order to ensure optimal availability of

manpower, equipment, platforms and weapons

The author does not call for the decentralization of command structures. Modern warfare

cannot be waged by top-heavy centralized decision making alone. The role of the Unified

Theatre Command will be to define the overall “war doctrine” at a strategic level, while

delegating actual tactical battle planning and execution to the various sector commands.

The wars of the present and the future are “information wars” and it is important to collate

all the data across multiple sectors in order to create a real-time image of the war across the

entire battlefront. Thus the role of the Unified Theatre Command will be to

- Create a real-time image in order to visualize the war across the entire battlefront

- This will enable military leadership to transfer manpower, weapons and resources to

from one sector to another in real time, or deploy reserve forces to a particular sector

based on the outcomes of individual battles

- Create a strategic roadmap for a possible future conflict with China, thus allowing for

smarter defense procurements and allocation of manpower

- Identify, develop, test and validate future weapons and technologies in electronic

warfare, cyberspace and artificial intelligence domains in order to prevent the PLA from

crippling civilian and military infrastructure prior to battle.

An argument can be made that a war with China will very likely be a two-front war or a two

and half front war, with Pakistan and various insurgent groups acting to destabilize the

country from within. In this two-front war scenario, it is opined that Pakistan and China can

be looked at, not in terms of two separate theatres of conflict but as one large theatre.

Given the fact that China supplies Pakistan with large quantities of defense equipment, and

that interoperability between the two armed forces is improving over time, the use of newly

raised IBGs under existing Indian command structures is more than adequate, given the

sector specific nature of each Indian Army and Air Force command. The author is however

of the view that both China and Pakistan while sharing some common goals, have different

political and military objectives. A war with China would likely create a second front with

Pakistan, who will seek to annex Jammu and Kashmir. A war with China could be fought for

a variety of reasons that range from China’s desire to assert regional dominance through

limited conflict to an all-out war to annex Arunachal Pradesh. The author strongly believes

that irrespective of a one front or a two-front war, Unified Theatre Commands are still

essential to fighting future information wars.

Creating a Robust Army Air Arm

During the Kargil War, one of the key takeaways was the lack of agreement between the

Indian Army and Air Force in terms of air support. The army requested use of helicopter

gunships, only to be refused by Air Force which was in favor of precision air strikes. While

this did not ultimately impact the outcome of the war in a significant war, in a broader

conflict, disagreements of this nature can be the difference between victory and defeat.[23]

The author proposes that the Army Air wing be allocated the primary use of close infantry

support air assets such as rotary wing helicopters, drones and other weapons platforms.

Take for example the current procurement of attack helicopters. India has ordered 22 AH-

64E Apache helicopters of which at the time of writing eight have been delivered. Ten are to

be sanctioned towards airbases facing Pakistan, the other ten being sanctioned to bases

facing China with the last two kept in reserve [24]. After a prolonged turf battle between the

Indian Army and IAF, the Ministry of Defense sided in favor of the IAF in terms of ultimate

operational ownership of these Apache helicopters. As a result, the Indian Army now seeks

to place an order for a paltry 6 Apache helicopters for its Air Wing [25]. Likewise, when

observing the induction pattern of the Light Combat Helicopter indigenously developed by

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, it is noted that both the Army and Air Force have placed

orders resulting in duplication of platforms [26].

The author agrees that the Indian Army and the Indian Air Force has every right to procure

the same platforms citing specific threats and mission requirements unique to each service.

However, duplication of procurements as a consequence of “turf battles” between the

Indian Army and Air Force is counterproductive in the long run. Thus, the author is of the

opinion if the newly created IBGs are to be have the necessary firepower to prevail against a

conventionally superior Chinese military, the Army’s Air Arm must be given ultimate

ownership of rotary wing air assets and other close quarters infantry support air platforms.

Countering China at Sea: The Naval Dimension It is fallacious to assume that Indian Navy’s Western and Eastern Commands are theatre

centric. While, from an administrative point of view, it is convenient to assume that the

Western Naval Command is responsible for managing conflict with Pakistan and its Eastern

counterpart is responsible for managing conflict for China, this structuring is outdated given

the threat assessment of today. China has established a naval presence in ports at

Chittagong, Hambantota, Gawdar and Djibouti among others. It is not essential to physically

place the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) warships in each of these ports to

constitute a threat. The use of these ports as listening posts and fuelling stations coupled

with China’s increased naval activity in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) will require that all of

the Indian Navy’s Commands work in close cohesion with each other in order to remain

vigilant towards China’s increasingly assertive naval posture in the region.

In the aftermath of 26/11, the Indian Navy was put in charge of ensuring net security of

India’s maritime boundaries. This was done as the Coast Guard at the time lacked the

requisite manpower and equipment to perform the task on its own. This resulted in the

Navy pivoting away from a key goal of becoming a “blue water force” towards a more

coastal defense type role. In the last few years, the Navy and the Coast Guard alike have

made huge strides towards improving capabilities in order to protect India’s coastlines. This

has allowed the Navy to re-focus on the overall goal of winning future naval conflicts in

wartime, while protecting India’s naval interests and vital maritime trade routes in

peacetime.

The PLAN currently has around 300 warship hulls. This includes 23 destroyers, 59 frigates,

and 37 corvettes and 76 submarines, including ballistic missile submarines armed with long

range nuclear missiles, nuclear-powered attack submarines, and diesel electric attack

submarines. The PLAN currently has more warships than the United States Navy which is

estimated to have around 287 warship hulls[27]. In comparison, India has only around 140

warships and around 220 aircraft with another 56 ships on order.[28] This numerical

disparity may seem alarming to a casual observer but quality of warships play a far more

decisive role than quantity. China lacks the major power projection platforms required to

carry our long-range, expeditionary operations. China currently has only one carrier, and no

amphibious assault ships. It has no cruisers, or a surface ship larger than a destroyer and no

principle ships to protect carriers and other platforms from missile attacks. The Jingdao-

class Type 056 Corvette and the Jiangkai-II-class Type 054A frigate ship types currently make

up around 2/3s of the Chinese naval fleet. he Jingdao-class Type 056 Corvette are small

lightly armed ships and can only perform submarine hunting missions off the Chinese coast

while the Jiangkai-II-class Type 054A frigate lacks the ability to defend aircraft carriers[27].

In contrast, while the US Navy has only 287 warship hulls, it possesses 11 carrier groups and

numerous surface combatants that can carry out long range expeditionary missions at short

notice. The PLAN is rapidly making strides to address these qualitative gaps by building a

second Type 002 carrier as well as simultaneously constructing two Type 003 carriers. China

is also constructing one Type 075 amphibious assault ship and at least four Renhai-class

Type 055 warships, which can be classified as guided missile cruisers.[27]

The Jingdao-class Type 056 Corvette

Image Courtesy: Navy Recognition

China currently has maritime disputes with Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines,

Taiwan, and Vietnam in the South China Sea, and also with Japan and South Korea. China’s

increasing militarization of the South China Sea has resulted in the need for the PLAN to

maintain a continuous and robust presence in the area. As such, in a future conflict with

India, it is unlikely that the PLAN will dispatch all of its surface and underwater combatants

against the Indian Navy. The Indian Navy must focus on competing qualitatively instead of

trying to match the PLAN in numbers. In order to decisively dominate an adversary in any

future conflict, the PLA and the PLAN have developed robust Anti Access/Area Denial

(AA/AD) platforms that can be used to deter intervention by both Asian and Western navies.

The University of Sydney’s United States Study Center has warned in a study that the PLA

has developed long range missiles in sufficient numbers in order to overwhelm Western and

Asian military bases in the Western Pacific in a matter of hours.[29]While the contents of

this study can be debated, what is clear is that in the absence of strong naval platforms, the

PLA has focused on AA/AD capabilities to protect against future naval conflicts.

There is no strategic or tactical rationale in combining the Eastern Naval Command into an

ITC with the army and air force. Instead the Eastern, Western and Southern Naval

Commands need to work with greater synergy in concert with the Southern Air Command to

develop AA/AD platforms that will deter a PLAN invasion of the Indian Ocean in any future

conflict. The naval commands must be given the overall responsibility and the autonomy to

purchase surface to ship missiles, coastal batteries, and naval air assets that include multi-

role helicopters, fighter jets and anti-submarine helicopters to create a robust AA/AD

infrastructure. The building of surface combatants and submarines is important, but

adequate resources, funding and planning must be given towards creating sufficient AA/AD

capabilities. To assign technologically superior air assets such as Rafale and Suhkoi jets only

to airbases responsible for China and Pakistan while deploying Light Combat Aircraft (LCA)

Tejas jets to southern air bases is counterproductive given the nature of the current PLAN

force capabilities. To de-prioritize India’s maritime defense in favor of trying to win a land

war could lead to catastrophic consequences for India.

Conclusion India needs to take a pragmatic look at her current state of defense preparedness when

planning for any future conflict. It is important not to be haunted by the ghosts of the past,

but at the same time learn from errors of the past. It is discouraging to note that more than

five decades after the 1962 war, not all the lessons have been learnt and for the ones that

have been learnt, steps taken to prevent against making the same blunders have not been

fully implemented. There still remains a great divide between political aspirations and

military realities and the level of dialogue between the political decision making class and

military leadership needs to be more frequent. Any attempt to create an ITC that mirrors

Western equivalents simply as a show of strength domestically and internationally can have

disastrous consequences in any future conflict that may arise.

There is a need to develop defensive and offensive capabilities taking into account India’s

political goals, willingness to spend on defense and a clear, fact based threat assessment of

the future. India is not a country with designs of hegemony over the sovereignty of other

nations. India seeks only to maintain the territorial integrity of her borders while providing

security and stability to the region. It is along these lines that the Indian Armed Forces of

tomorrow need to be shaped and prepared and not in a one-size-fit-all solution.

References

[1] “PM Modi announces Chief of Defence Staff: How it will make Indian military more lethal” India Today; August 16 2019. https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/story/how-cds- make-military-lethal-pm-modi-independence-day-1581229-2019-08-16 [2] “The establishment of CDS an excellent step, but more work necessary” Observer Research Foundation; August 16, 2019. https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/the-establishment-of-cds-an-excellent-step-but- more-work-necessary-54515/ [3] Indian Army Commands; https://www.indianarmy.nic.in/Site/FormTemplete/frmTempMainPage.aspx?MnId=A7jiS4L Lj2QE72rCDlAu2A==&ParentID=qS0fYp6FqWXtpeWpD0i9rQ==&flag=TPBbxtS8lgmrg8z+CSld aQ== [4] Indian Navy Commands; https://www.indiannavy.nic.in/content/commands [5] Indian Air Force Commands; http://indianairforce.nic.in/sitemap

[6] “Indian air force official to head Strategic Forces Command”; Aviation Week; January 21 2003.https://aviationweek.com/awin/indian-air-force-official-head-strategic-forces- command [7] Google Maps https://www.google.com/search?q=udhampur+to+shillonh&oq=udhampur+to+shillonh&aq s=chrome..69i57j33l2.4492j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 [8] “India’s Defence Budget 2019-20” Institute of Defense Studies and Analysis; July 8th 2019 https://idsa.in/issuebrief/indias-defence-budget-2019-20-lkbehera-080719 [9] “China’s defence spending: a question of perspective?” International Institute of Strategic Studies Military Balance Blog; 24 May 2019 https://www.iiss.org/blogs/military- balance/2019/05/china-defence-spending [10] “Spokesperson: PLA's theater commands adjustment & establishment accomplished” China Military Online, 2nd February 2016 http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/view/2016- 02/02/content_7160702.htm [11] China’s Ministry of Defense - Eastern Theatre Command http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/armed-forces/eastern-theatre-command.htm [12] China’s Ministry of Defense - Southern Theatre Command http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/armed-forces/southern-theatre-command.htm [13] China’s Ministry of Defense - Western Theatre Command http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/armed-forces/western-theatre-command.htm [14] China’s Ministry of Defense - Northern Theatre Command http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/armed-forces/northern-theatre-command.htm [15] China’s Ministry of Defense - Central Theatre Command http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/armed-forces/central-theatre-command%20.htm [16] The Military Balance 2018; International Institute of Strategic Studies; Pages 228, 257; Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group [17] “India is world’s second-largest arms importer”, The Hindu, March 12th 2019 https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-is-worlds-second-largest-arms- importer/article26502417.ece [18] “How the IAF compares with the PAF”, The Hindu Businessline,March 1st 2019 https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/how-the-iaf-compares-with-the- paf/article26411688.ece [19] “Indian Navy aiming at 200-ship fleet by 2027” The Economic Times, July 14th 2018; https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/indian-navy-aiming-at-200-ship-fleet- by-2027/articleshow/48072917.cms?from=mdr [20] “Army to get steep-dive BrahMos missle regiment for China front” Economic Times, July 14th 2018; https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/army-to-get-steep-dive-brahmos-

missile- regiment-for-china-front/articleshow/53515126.cms?from=mdr [21] “Army’s first Integrated Battle Groups to be structured by end of next month” The Hindu, 2019

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/armys-first-integrated-battle-groups-to-be-structured-by-end-

[22] “Defence minister inaugurates Information Management and Analysis Centre (IMAC) Gurgaon”Current Affairs, November 4th, 2014; https://currentaffairs.gktoday.in/defence-minister-inaugurates-information [23]“Kargil Controversy: An IAF Response” Volume 25,January - March 2010; Published online, June 23 2018 http://www.indiandefencereview.com/spotlights/kargil-controversy-an-iaf-response/ [24]“First four IAF Apache helicopters arrive in India” Jane’s 360, July 28 2019; https://www.janes.com/article/90130/first-four-iaf-apache-helicopters-arrive-in-india

[25]”Apache attack helicopters to be inducted into IAF at Pathankot on September 3” The Times of India, August 30 2019 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/apache-attack-helicopters-to-be-inducted-into-iaf-at-pathankot-on-september 3/articleshow/70912753.cms [26]“ India’s Light Combat Helicopter Completes Weapons Trials” The Diplomat; January 23 2019 https://thediplomat.com/2019/01/indias-light-combat-helicopter-completes-weapons- trials/ [27]“China Now Has More Warships Than the U.S.”Popular Mechanics; May 20 2019 https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27532437/china-now-has-more- warships-than-the-us/ [28]“India is beefing up its navy to counter China's increasingly powerful fleet”Business Insider; December 6 2018 https://www.businessinsider.com/india-is-beefing-up-its-navy-to-counter-chinas-powerful- fleet-2018-12?IR=T [29]“China Missiles Could Overwhelm U.S. Military in Asia in ‘Hours’, Says Think Tank” Bloomberg; August19, 2019 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-19/china-could-crush-some-u-s- military-assets-in-hours

Glossary of Terms

AA/AD - Anti Access/Area Denial ADA - Air Defense Artillery AEW&C - Airborne Early Warning and Control System CDS - Chief of Defense Staff GoM - Group of Ministers MAC - Military Area Command IAF - Indian Air Force IBG – Integrated Battle Groups IMAC – Information Management and Analysis Center IOR - Indian Ocean Region ITC - Integrated Theatre Command LCA - Light Combat Aircraft PLA - People’s Liberation Army PLAN - People’s Liberation Army Navy PRC - People’s Republic of China R&D - Research & Development SAM - Surface to Air Missile UCAV – Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle USD - United States Dollars