‘An arrow shot by an archer may or may not kill a single person; but skillful intrigue, devised by a wise man, may kill even those who are in the womb.’ [Acharya Chanakya]
Physical wars have been an inevitable part of humanity throughout ages, from the Mahabharata war to the current conflicts across the world. The need for ‘power’ and to ‘conquer’ others through aggression, violence and bloodshed has not changed since ancient times and this has always inevitably resulted in loss of lives and assets, and compromises of values, principles and ethics.
In this modern age of technological disruptions and scientific innovations, physical (open) war has mostly been replaced by covert war carried out silently. Every type of war requires that the state must be fortified, the armed forces always prepared for war, and large sections of the population trained to defend the country and themselves during the course of war. Chanakya’s Arthashastra suggests that in order to achieve peace, policy has to be shaped prudently and through diplomacy. However, he also specifies that to excel in any war; it is appropriate to use assassination, discord, spying and false propaganda to achieve victory.
“I know that today’s era is not the era for war,” Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi told Russian President Vladimir Putin at a meeting in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, in September 2022. This is more than an advice from the former to the latter. It’s an insight into India’s strategy to conduct war through diplomacy by building friendly relationships with countries. Effectively, India’s political leadership is following the advice of Sun Tzu, the Chinese philosopher, military strategist and General in ancient China; “to fight wars without going into battle and to subdue the enemy without fighting.”
This is a necessity for India at the present moment. Our military hardware is inadequate for battle across two fronts. The government’s publicly available reports suggest that by 2030 the IAF may have only 30 fighter squadrons while the projected requirement is for 45 squadrons. Half of the current aircraft are expected to reach the end of their combat capability life between now and then, while the Government’s policy to boost domestic manufacturing of defense systems is currently sluggish at best. About 80% of Indian Army’s equipment and 60% of IAF equipment is of Russian origin. The Navy’s share of Russian equipment is 40% but it is dependent on European suppliers for many of the critical equipment used on ships. The Indian policy makers have to make a harder push towards indigenization of critical weapons systems to replaced the ageing ones. Fighter jets and their component systems, helicopters, battle tanks, the Navy’s submarines; should not dependent of foreign suppliers for technologies and spare parts. Our defense preparedness will remain lacking in required efficiency until 100% indigenization is achieved. This will require the mindset change from blind modernization, to achieving effective performance of available weapons systems.
Significant flaws have to be addressed in the areas of qualitative requirements and equipment procurement. Policy confusions from the past has forced and at times is still forcing our military to perform without full preparations, and the uncoordinated efforts of military modernization, sluggish indigenized technological advances and improvised tactics cannot make up for the structural deficiencies in our defense preparedness. The recent thrust on indigenous technology for military modernization will need almost a decade to show an optimal deterrent effect at the battle-field level, leaving the Indian military to defend our nation’s sovereignty with whatever resources that are available, inadequate as they might be. Defense modernization has to be combined with upgraded logistics and a military-industrial infrastructure that will increase our defense preparedness to the levels required for our optimal security needs. Till then, India is necessarily dependent on its international diplomacy skills to keep our adversaries; China and its puppet state Pakistan in a state of constant insecurity.
This will require a policy that will stop overt and covert attacks against India, its citizens, its interests, its friends and allies around the world, as well as to create an international environment inhospitable to our adversaries and their supporters. The strategy must emphasize that all instruments of national power; diplomatic, economic, law enforcement, financial, information dissemination, intelligence, and military; are to be called upon in combating international and domestic dangers. The policy should fit into the wider strategic concept of “defense-in-depth,” and should complement other elements including sub-strategies against weapons of mass destruction, cyber-attack, infrastructure protection, and narcotics control. It must focus on identifying and eliminating threats before they reach the borders of India. A strong preemptive component must be included in this policy, along-with a strong focus on reducing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and a defense-in-depth framework to secure our Nation.
India’s security policy must contain concentric perimeters of security or ‘security rings.’ The outermost will consist of intelligence organizations and diplomats operating overseas. Their primary objective should be to gather information that will preempt attacks on Indian soil. The next inner perimeter should be a mix of Customs, Immigration, Coast Guard and Border guards whose focus will be on the borders of India and the goods and persons crossing through. The next inner perimeter should be central and state police, Home Guard, and allied services that function within the borders of our Nation and are responsible for protecting our towns and cities. The innermost ring should be a public- private partnership between the private sector and government departments to play a joint role in the protection of critical infrastructures such as transport (land-sea-air), financial, communications (mobile, broadband, TV, radio) and power (electricity generation).
Diminish, Deny, Defend and Defeat should be the core principle.
Sun Tzu said, “If you know the enemy and know yourself, your victory will not stand in doubt.”
China and its loyal media channels have been advertising Chinese triumphs ranging from the launch of its first super aircraft-carrier to winning in Asia, diplomatically and economically. After it infected the world with the Covid-19 virus, most countries consider China as a major threat, with increasingly negative views about its politics and aspirations. While China and its autocratic rulers focus on a top-down planning and centralized policy making approaches for their policies; we should utilize our democratic values and our assets of diversity, agility, adaptability and ambiguity towards greater advantage in our fight against foreign influences. We must convert our goals into requirements, clearly define and communicate the outcomes, give incentives to achieve these defined outcomes, and allow private industry the freedom to innovate. China has been waging global economic warfare since 1998, and to counter this aspect we have to ensure that our economic objectives are integrated into our acquisition strategy and functionality. To quote Sun Tzu, “water naturally runs from high places and hastens downwards. Thus, in war, the way to victory is to avoid what is strong and strike at what is weak.”
In our complex bureaucratic processes, we are often focused on issues that we cannot change. Instead we should, like water, follow the path of least resistance, achieving a continuous pursuit of progress, while striving for victory.
‘If the end could be achieved by non-military methods, even by methods of intrigue, duplicity and fraud, I would not advocate an armed conflict’. [Acharya Chanakya].
