Piecemeal defence

Piecemeal defence

After the sleaze of the last fortnight comes more palatable news from the defence establishment. Conscious of the image rebuilding requirements, the Union Cabinet has immediately got down to the task of considering the recommendations of a group of ministers for revamping defence structures. Key proposals concern setting up a defence procurement board and appointing a chief of defence staff at the apex of the three armed services. The focus on efficiency and restructuring is welcome. It is time to get out from beneath the dunghill of corruption and move forward. The country should be told how a defence procurement board, which sounds like a move to centralise decision-making, will be an improvement on the present system. However, with a board at the helm it would be clear where the buck stops. It may bring about more transparency and accountability if members of the board are held ultimately responsible for all decisions on technical, financial and other aspects. How is it intended to work? To help restorepublic confidence in the procurement process a full public statement from the defence minister would be desirable.

It has taken a shock to the system to push the government a bit closer towards setting up a distinct nuclear command in the defence forces. It is envisaged that the chief of defence staff -- who will probably be the seniormost of the three defence chiefs -- will be head of the nuclear forces although what they will consist of is as yet unformulated. Whether the CDS is a one-off decision or part of a systematic exercise covering conventional forces and nuclear forces with short and longer term perspectives remains to be seen. Certainly a number of major developments -- the modernisation of conventional forces which is going on apace, the nuclear tests and Kargil -- all demand that there be a systematic approach to defence preparedness. There is also a mountain of recommendations from post-Kargil and defence review committees. But the evidence suggests the piecemeal approach continues. And Tehelka has introduced more confusion into the situation. Not only is the foreign minister doubling as defenceminister, but the heavily burdened National Security Adviser is somewhat distracted by having to battle various allegations. The National Security Council has for all intents and purposes been defunct for months.

The political crisis comes on top of other impediments which have delayed the emergence of coherent military doctrines. It looks, therefore, as though the military nuclear command structure is soon to have a head but building the body will depend on what nuclear doctrine the country eventually adopts. And of that there is no sign. There is a draft nuclear doctrine with ambitious and contradictory aims. While that doctrine still has to be debated in Parliament and finalised, the world scene is changing rapidly. A profound change may be taking place in military doctrines abroad. Led by the Bush administration's push for missile defence systems, the world could see a decisive shift from offensive to defensive weapons systems. Meanwhile India seems to creep at a snail's pace towards yesterday's goals.