Content
- The battlefield, change and the Indian armed forces
- Changing the frame
The battlefield, change and the Indian armed forces
Context of Changing Warfare
- New nature of conflict: Wars are shifting towards multi-domain (land, air, sea, cyber, space, information).
- Key technologies shaping battlefield:
- Artificial Intelligence (AI)
- Automation and drones
- Cheap precision weapons
- Implication: Lower cost of force application but higher risks of escalation and operational vulnerabilities.
- India’s challenge: Facing a potential two-front threat (China + Pakistan), requiring faster adaptation in doctrine, structure, and technology.
Relevance :
- GS 2 (Governance, IR & Security): Defence reforms, civil–military relations, national security strategy.
- GS 3 (Security, Technology, Defence): Multi-domain warfare, AI/drones, defence tech, jointness challenges, indigenisation.
Practice Question : Examine the key reforms and structural changes in the Indian Armed Forces aimed at enhancing jointness and multi-domain operational capability. What challenges remain in translating these reforms into operational effectiveness?(250 words)
Institutional & Structural Reforms
- From ‘coordination’ to ‘command’:
- Earlier: Loose coordination among services, limited jointness.
- Now: Move towards Integrated Theatre Commands.
- ISO Act & Rules, 2025: Empower commanders of joint organisations with disciplinary and administrative authority.
- Tri-service agencies: Created under HQ IDS for cyber, space, and special operations.
- PM Modi’s push: Declared “Year of Reforms – Transformation for the Future” at Combined Commanders Conference (2025).
New Force Structures & Doctrines
- Integrated Battle Groups (IBGs): Modular, all-arms brigades (“Rudra”, “Bhairav”) deployable within 12–48 hours.
- Joint Doctrine of Indian Armed Forces (2017) and Army’s Land Warfare Doctrine (2018): Laid foundation for synergy.
- Amphibious Operations Doctrine (2025): First framework integrating maritime-air-land forces for littoral warfare.
- Ran Samvad (2025): Tri-service seminar stressing “future hybrid warriors” (tech-savvy, info warriors).
Technology & Capability Upgrades
- MQ-9B drones: Persistent ISR + precision strikes across land and sea.
- Rafale-M order (Navy): Boosts carrier aviation, maritime strike, and fleet air defence.
- Pralay missile trials (2025): Strengthens land-based theatre fires, quasi-ballistic missile with 150–500 km range.
- Akashteer C2 system: AI-enabled automated command for Army air defence, linked with Air Force’s IACCS.
- Carrier-centred maritime posture: Navy developing a 15-year road map for air, subsurface, and unmanned systems.
Key Challenges
- Slow pace of integration: A decade after prioritisation, joint PME only now being institutionalised.
- Cultural resistance: Service silos, career incentives, and inter-service rivalries remain.
- Jointness: Large-scale tri-service mobilisation yet to be tested (e.g., Operation Sindoor was mainly aerial).
- Data & interoperability gaps: Lack of common standards, secure networks, and shared operational picture.
- Logistics & sustainment issues: Different procurement cycles and spares chains across services.
Comparisons
- China: Already has fully functional Integrated Theatre Commands for years, with tested joint doctrines.
- India: Must design indigenously, not blindly copy Chinese or Western models.
- Western militaries: Use common data architecture, integrated PME, and tested joint logistics — areas where India lags.
Strategic Implications
- Deterrence: New precision and ISR assets raise costs for adversaries on both fronts.
- Operational tempo: Without integrated C2, India risks slower decision cycles (OODA loop disadvantage).
- Escalation management: Faster precision-strike capabilities compress political decision timelines.
- Industrial base: Heavy reliance on foreign platforms underscores urgency of defence–industry–university fusion.
Way Forward
- Pilot Theatre Commands: Start with limited mandates, evaluate performance metrics (mobilisation time, ISR sharing, logistics uptime).
- Common Data Framework: Enforce tri-service standards for ISR, targeting, and C2.
- Joint PME overhaul: Train “technologist-commanders” with mandatory tri-service and tech tracks.
- Civil-Military Fusion: DRDO, DPSUs, private industry, and universities to be embedded in rapid prototyping cycles.
- Annual Joint Stress Tests: Simulate cyber denial, logistics disruption, and multi-domain joint fires.
- Scorecard accountability: Publish measurable KPIs (deployment timelines, ISR integration %, PME graduates, procurement interoperability).
Conclusion
- India has initiated serious reforms (ISO Rules, IBGs, PME, modern procurement) but jointness is still structural, not yet operational.
- Success depends on speed of implementation, cultural acceptance, and embedding technology into doctrine and PME.
- Without accelerated integration, India risks expensive but siloed capabilities rather than a truly adaptive, multi-domain military.
Disclaimer : The views and opinions expressed here are based on the original article published in THE HINDU and do not reflect the official stance of Legacy IAS Academy. This content is provided solely for Academic purposes.
Changing the frame
Context of the Issue
- India’s 2025 monsoon: 8% above normal (87 cm long-period average).
- Agricultural impact:
- Kharif sown area ↑ 15 lakh hectares → 1,110 lakh hectares.
- Rice cultivation ↑ 8.45 lakh hectares (438 vs 430 lakh ha last year).
- Pulses, coarse cereals, oilseeds also showed similar gains.
- Reservoirs: Storage at 163 BCM (vs 157.8 BCM in 2024) → better water availability.
- Problem: Excessive rainfall led to floods, landslides, erosion, siltation, and urban inundation, especially in Himachal, J&K, and Punjab.
Relevance
- GS 1 (Geography): Monsoon variability, extreme rainfall, floods/landslides.
- GS 2 (Governance, Social Issues): Disaster governance, Centre–State preparedness gaps, policy framing bias.
- GS 3 (Environment, Disaster Management): Flood management, IMD forecasting integration, urban resilience, climate adaptation.
Practice Question : In India, droughts are seen as emergencies demanding action, while floods are often dismissed as natural occurrences. Critically analyse this asymmetry in disaster preparedness and suggest measures to reframe excess rainfall as a predictable and mitigable calamity.(250 words)
Regional Rainfall Distribution
- Northwest India: +27% above average.
- Central India: +15% above average.
- South Peninsula: +10% above average.
- Localized extremes: Cloudburst-like events reported — though technically, only one verified (Tamil Nadu).
- Framing challenge: Media/officials loosely label any deluge as “cloudburst,” skewing public understanding.
The Framing Problem
- Droughts: Seen as emergencies needing war footing response.
- Excess rains: Viewed as “bounty” or natural blessing — despite being equally destructive.
- IMD forecasts: Consistently warned of “above normal” monsoon since April 2025.
- When forecasts match → celebrated as forecasting success.
- But → inadequate preparedness for floods goes underplayed.
- Terminology impact:
- Words like cloudburst → rare, unavoidable disasters.
- Words like normal rainfall → convey inevitability, masking potential damage.
Key Challenges Identified
- Preparedness bias: Government machinery prioritises drought over flood-readiness.
- Infrastructure gaps: Poor urban drainage, weak embankments, inadequate flood-control structures.
- Land degradation: Siltation, erosion, landslides → long-term ecological harm.
- Communication gaps: Misuse of meteorological terms leads to poor public awareness.
- Accountability gap: Treating excess rainfall as “natural” rather than as a risk to be mitigated.
Strategic Implications
- Food security: Gains in sowing could be negated if floods destroy standing crops.
- Economic losses: Agriculture, rural livelihoods, and infrastructure face recurrent damage.
- Urban resilience: Flooded cities highlight vulnerability to climate extremes.
- Climate change factor: Intensification of extreme rainfall events linked to warming atmosphere.
What Needs to Change ?
- Shift in mindset: Stop framing excess rainfall as natural munificence; treat it as a calamity risk.
- Use forecasts as triggers for preparedness, not just as meteorological achievements.
- Government responsibility: Failure to prepare for floods must be seen as abdication of duty.
- Forecast integration: Embed IMD projections into:
- Urban drainage planning
- Reservoir management protocols
- Crop advisories and crop insurance planning
- Disaster relief mobilisation
Way Forward
- Forecast-based action: Convert IMD’s “above-normal” predictions into district-level flood contingency plans.
- Urban flood mitigation: Modern drainage, rainwater harvesting, flood zoning.
- Reservoir operation protocols: Dynamic water release based on real-time rainfall forecasts.
- Stronger communication: Public education on rainfall risks; avoid misuse of “cloudburst.”
- Integrated disaster management: Treat excess rainfall like droughts — requiring proactive mobilisation, not reactive relief.
- Climate adaptation: Invest in long-term watershed management, embankment reinforcement, and resilient cropping patterns.
Bottom Line
- India’s forecasting ability is improving, but the framing and governance response remain outdated.
- Droughts evoke urgency; floods are downplayed as natural gifts — this asymmetry leaves India underprepared.
- Reframing excess rainfall as a predictable, mitigable calamity is essential to protect lives, livelihoods, and infrastructure.
