Can this be termed as Reform in Higher Defence Management ?

Can this be termed as Reform in Higher Defence Management ?

The Central Government yesterday approved the appointment of military personnel of the three forces as the additional secretary and joint secretary in the Department of Military Affairs (DMA). This decision has been hailed by many as a land mark decision taken by the Govt.

Given the external conditions in which India has to defend itself, this decision was long warranted as these positions in the DMA were held by the IAS cader and the appointment of military officers has streamlined the functions.

However, before calling it a landmark decision that would change the higher defence management in India we need to examine the whole structure and see whether these reforms will really bring a great change, as envisaged.

The DMA that came into being on 1^st January 2020, as a major reform in the higher defence management, which was in addition to four existing departments that function under the Ministry of Defence.

They are namely, the Departments of Defence, the Department of Defence Research, the Department of Defence Production and Development and lastly, the Department of Ex-service welfare. The Defence Secretary functions as Head of the Department of Defence and is also additionally responsible for co-coordinating the activities of the five Departments in the Ministry.

So, if CDS, Gen Bipin Rawat having served as the Chief of Army Staff is still heading one Department and the Secretary of Department of Defence is responsible for coordinating the activities of all the departments then perhaps nothing really has changed after all. Rather, Gen Bipin Rawat has been conveniently demoted.

All that the IAS Babus have done is fool the Armed Forces by allowing them to create one additional department to be headed and staffed by the Faujis who would still be working under the overall umbrella of IAS Babus i.e. the Defence Secretary, who does not have any understanding of issues related to Strategy, Security, Military Equipment etc.

Now let’s look at the functions of each department. The principal functions of all the Departments are as follows:

1. The Department of Defence. The Department of Defence is mandated with Defence of India including formulation of the defence policy. It deals with Inter-Services Organizations, Defence Accounts Department, Coast Guard and is responsible for the defence Budget, defence lands and cantonments, matters relating to Parliament, and defence cooperation with foreign countries.
2. The Department of Defence Production. The Department of Defence Production is headed by a Secretary and deals with matters pertaining to defence production, equipment and spares, planning and control of the Ordnance Factory Board and Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs). 
3. The Department of Defence Research and Development. The Department of Defence Research and Development is headed by a Secretary. Its function is to advise the Government on scientific aspects of military equipment and logistics and the formulation of research, design and development plans for equipment required by the Services.
4. The Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare. The Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare is headed by a Secretary and deals with all resettlement, welfare and pension-related matters of Ex-Servicemen.
5. The Department of Military Affairs. This Department deals with the Armed Forces of the Union namely, Army, Navy and Air Force; Integrated Headquarters of the Ministry of Defence; the Territorial Army; works relating to the three services etc. The Department promotes close cooperation among the three Services. The DMA will also look after the procurement exclusive to the three services — barring capital acquisitions, according to prevalent rules and procedures, besides the Territorial Army and various functions relating to the Services — its mandate includes promoting ‘jointness’ in procurement, training and staffing for the services through joint planning and integration of their requirements. Currently, Gen Bipin Rawat is heading this Department and is given the rank of a Secretary (Secy).

Now, if the Secretary of Department of Defence who is an IAS has been made responsible for coordinating the activities of each department, the following questions arise:

One. Where does it leave Gen Rawat, who is also appointed as Secretary in the overall structure of MOD?

Two. Does it allow Def Secy to overrule the Head of DMA i.e. Gen Bipin Rawat?

Three. Does each Department Head have direct access to the Defence Minister or their access is routed through the Def Secy who is made responsible for coordinating the activities of each department?

Four. If the Def Secy is responsible for coordinating the activities of each department then it implies that all files that go to Defence Minister are still routed through Def Secy. In such a case nothing really has changed, has it?

Five. Can this kind of vague structure in future allow the Defence Minister to neglect or undermine the views of DMA head?

Six. So, the same issues or challenges or irritants that were faced by armed forces will still be faced by them albeit at a lower scale?

On the appointment of CDS General VP Malik had said, “Now that we are going to have a CDS, his direct responsibility will be, of course, all the nuclear outfits and all the nuclear organizations and outfits that we have, including the strategic command. The other responsibility would be of ensuring coordination and jointness so that all the three services work together and the inter-operability improves amongst the three services. Plus if there are any differences among the services, he will be able to sort it out and he will also have the direct access to the Prime Minister and will be kind of a consultant of defence issues”. He adds that the appointment may be more economical because it ma+y do away with a certain amount of duplication that we have among the three services.

But when we look at the principal task of the Ministry of Defence we find, that its aim is to frame policy directions on defence and security related matters and communicate them for implementation to the Services Headquarters, Inter-Service Organizations, Production Establishments and Research & Development Organizations. It is required to ensure effective implementation of the Government's policy directions and the execution of approved programs within the allocated resources.

Now when we have a Def Secy who is an IAS having no background on Defence, strategy, foreign relations etc becoming a coordinating body and a Defence Minister, who is a Politician and has never dealt with security and strategy, it is intriguing that it is being claimed that the defence management has changed.

Does it therefore not appear that the IAS Babus have acted smart and made the three wings Army, Navy and Air Force as part of one department with their own departmental head working under the overall umbrella of Def secy.

If we look at the US Defence organization we would notice that the Defence Minister has always been either a Retired Military General or someone who has spent years studying strategy, defence policies at college level and has worked in defence policy making and think tank organizations. This goes for the Assistant Defence Secy and all major appointments in the Defence Ministry.

Conclusion

Although it may be termed as a forward looking move, towards better defence management but given the way the overall system functions, India’s Defence ministry is still a long way away from being professionally managed and prima facie it appears that the IAS Babus will still be calling the shots.