India needs cohesion between the political will emanating from the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the military strength of the armed forces. Each Service, especially during peacetime, pursues an independent role, thus inviting the bureaucracy of the MoD to act as an arbitrator. Notwithstanding the existence of the Chiefs of Staff Committee (COSC), the Defence Minister does not get the much-needed single point advice in the present arrangement. 

Background

In 1947, a committee of three senior Indian Civil Service (ICS) officers had suggested structuring of the MoD on the lines of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). In the process they had sought to lower the standing of military officers in relation to the ICS. But, Lord Mountbatten ensured that the Service Chiefs retained their status higher than the Defence Secretary. He also asked his Chief of Staff, Lord Ismay, to draw up a higher defence organisation for India. Conditions prevailing at that time did not permit the setting in motion of major changes which would have disturbed the ongoing system. Therefore, Lord Ismay did not propose a restructured organisation but recommended a number of committees to ensure a well-coordinated effort for national defence.

In essence the decision-making process was to have the benefit of independent inputs from the Chiefs of Staff Committee (COSC), the Defence Minister’s Committee (Service Chiefs were members of this Committee) and the Defence Committee of the Cabinet.  The functioning of the latter two Committees gradually degenerated into short-circuited ad hoc procedures particularly during the Nehru-Krishna Menon period. In the process, the Service Chiefs got marginalised from the decision-making bodies. 

The Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 and the Indo-Pak war of 1965 saw the adoption of some short-lived emergency procedures. Similarly, in 1971 the erstwhile Emergency Committee of the Cabinet, set up in 1962, gave way to the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA). Further, the Committee for Defence Planning, which had come up a little later, applied itself to reviewing defence plans but made no significant contributions. Thus, the Service Headquarters  have continued to remain outside the government’s decision-making machinery and the MoD have taken control of all defence matters-whether futuristic plans for modernisation or the promotion and postings of senior officers. While remaining responsible to ensure the defence of India, the armed forces have no control over the machinery that sustains such endeavours. 

The Necessity for a CDS

As an emerging power, nuclear India is in the midst of eventful happenings all of which demand speedy overhaul of our system of higher defence management. Ongoing trends clearly indicate the changing nature of war making. Real time intelligence, limitless communications, accuracy and lethality of weapon systems, and increasingly automated battlefield demand that progressively the three Service need to be structured, trained, equipped and brought to bear in an integrated manner. There is commonality and overlap in many of the tri-service areas-surveillance devices, air space management, air defence, missile systems and so on. Technological advancements will further increase the linkages. Then there are the nuclear issues; the process of transition from successfully conducting nuclear tests to acquiring deterrence capabilities is a complicated one. An important aspect would be to ensure interface between deterrence and conventional combat capabilities. The complexities demand well deliberated judgments and a single point military advice to the government on the full range of issues of higher defence management and higher direction of war- grand strategy, desired military capabilities, force structuring, modernisation plans, technological up-gradations, defence spending and so on. The CDS heading the COSC, with a status above the Service Chiefs, would be expected to examine issues in the overall perspective, consider options, identify inter-se priorities, present the case and render military advice to the government and thus participate in the decision-making.

The CDS could be a five- star or even four-star general, Naval or Air Force equivalent. He should have under him not only the three Service chiefs but also an effective tri-service operational and support structure.  It is joint team- work that will deliver the goods when war is forced upon us. The main functions of the CDS  who should report directly to, and be under the control of the Defence Minister, would be:- 

·                     To render single point advice to the Raksha Mantri on all matters pertaining to operations, operational intelligence, operational logistics, technology, technology management of forces, and communications. 

·                     Processing of all directives received.

·                     Implementing decisions.

Functioning of the CDS

The charter of the CDS should focus on the doctrinal precepts to deter or wage a war, evolution of joint operational plans, refinements in joint training, and enmeshing the tri-service logistic support systems for both war and peace. With regard to the division of responsibility: the CDS must have a policy orientation and should apply himself to the planning and advisory roles, whereas, the Chiefs should be responsible to keep their Service war worthy and must retain a distinct command and executive bias. The CDS should have power and prestige without lowering the status and station of the Service Chiefs. The process of selection of the CDS should have nothing to do with politics. To ensure a degree of continuity a fixed tenure of at least two years should be given to the CDS.

As far as the tri service staff and the secretarial support for the CDS is concerned, the present assets of the Defence Planning Staff, and the numerous committees of the COSC can be suitably organised for the purpose. Seen in totality, a CDS as a part of the MoD, makes good sense from the point of view of management and bureaucratic streamlining. The Services will be able to share the centre stage of decision-making.