As per the recent Pentagon report, China is accelerating the modernisation of its war-fighting capabilities at an alarming pace. In response to this pressing threat, it has been identified that the Indian Armed Forces might be lacking a coordinated approach to effectively deal with the situation. China’s entire 4057-km frontier line of actual control is managed by the Western Theatre command. However, the challenge of disjointedness within the Indian army remains significant. To resolve this issue, it is suggested that India must consider implementing a unified theatre command.
Andaman and Nicobar Command: India’s Only Integrated Theatre Command
Founded in 2001 following the Kargil war, Andaman and Nicobar Command happens to be the only integrated theatre command in India. However, it is quite small and has limited resources. There exists a widespread demand for the reinstatement of complete naval control over this command.
Understanding the Concept of Theatre Command
Theatre command can be understood as an organisational structure created for controlling all military assets in a war zone to ensure comprehensive military effects. It is often referred to as a ‘theatre command’ in military parlance, which integrates components of the army, air force, and navy. This integration enables the senior military commander to have access to all forces’ resources. For instance, an eastern ‘theatre command’ would merge elements of the Army and the Air Force, and also integrate parts of the Navy. Currently, the only joint command is believed to be in the Andaman and Nicobar islands.
Perspectives Favoring Integration
An integrated theatre commander will not be accountable to individual Services and shall have the freedom to train, equip, and regulate his command to create a cohesive fighting force competent enough to achieve designated goals. The required logistic resources would also be made available to the theatre commander to ensure smooth operations.
Opposition Against Integration
Historically, all three services have shown commendable collaboration during times of warfare. With improved communication networks, these organizations can interact and plan more efficiently, thereby questioning the need for a new integrated organization.
Committee Name Recommendation Kargil Review Committee Lamented on compartmentalized planning against external and internal threats. Emphasised on the importance of Jointness. Shekatkar Committee Stressed on the need for integration to eliminate disjointed and fragmented execution at operational and lower levels.
Challenges Presented by the Current Structure
The current structure of Indian Armed Forces is presenting various challenges. None of the existing 17 commands is co-located at the same station, nor are their areas of operational responsibility contiguous. Also, there are 2 tri-service command – Strategic Forces Command (SFC) and Andaman and Nicobar Command (ANC), headed rotationally by officers from the three Services. As SFC has no specific geographic responsibility, it is not an integrated theatre command but an integrated functional command. There are also demands for other integrated functional commands, such as cyber, aerospace and Special Operations commands, which are yet to be approved by the government.
Mixed Opinions and Recommendations
While the Army is advocating for the move away from service-specific operations, the Air Force is strongly opposed due to lack of resources. The Navy also does not favour the proposal’s current implementation due to its perception of loss of autonomy. However, it has been recommended by both Kargil Review Committee and Shekatkar Committee that compartmentalized planning against threats leads to disjointed execution at operational levels and lacks synergy within the battle space. It is crucial that India address these challenges with a robust structure capable of responding quickly to emergent situations.