Aziz Hanifa's report on the book, Arming Without Aimimg: India's Military Modernization by Stephen B.Cohen and Sunil Dasgupta, ( India Abroad, Sept.17) does not summarize the arguments of the authors to support title of the book. The aim of India's of arming is just to keep the intruders away from its borders and to safeguard its legitimate interests around its borders.
India is modernizing its armed forces mainly because of the belligerence of its two neighbors who want to prevent the rise of India as an important power shaping the 21st century. It is true as pointed out by the authors of the book that India's "preferred stance has been military restraint" due to the fact that non-violence and non-aggression have been part of its ethos of the people of India for the last five thousand years.
Though China attacked India in 1962 and exploded an atomic device in 1964, India did just a technology demonstration in 1974. This immediately invited sanctions from the Western powers. It exploded a nuclear device only in 1998 after it was known all over the world that China was assisting Pakistan to become a nuclear power.
However the authors of the book have to be commended for highlighting " the defense acquisition process, which is amazingly convoluted" or as Ashley Tellis puts it, " internal sclerosis in India's internal defense thinking". One of the reasons for this is the commission or corruption involved in military procurement which runs into thousands of crore of rupees ( Swedish gun (bofors), French & German sub-marines, Isreali missiles (Barack). Besides, in defense purchases, consumer is not the king : restrictive clauses on the purchase of war ship (USA) and escalation in the price of air-craft carrier (Russia).
Unlike China which produces most of its defense requirements, India still depends on imported armaments as defense R&D is still inadequate. Indian private sector is still taboo in military equipment industry as the state is afraid of the emergence of military-industrial complex in the country. Then there is the fear of strong military in view of the Pakistani experience.
Indian politicians have let down India and the Indian Army in many ways. Kashmir is the problem created by the politicians and the army was not given a free hand. The Chinese invasion was due to the romantic view of the Chinese Communists by the politicians. The report of Lt.Gen.Henderson Brooks and Brig.P.S.Bhagat 1962 war is still a state secret, 48 years after, as it is supposed to be an indictment of politicians.
India has to overcome these issues with a clear vision of its future. India cannot continue to be a reluctant power. A continental country, an emerging economy, a democratic polity and an ancient civilization should not allow itself to be bullied by others. Only power, economic and military, can ensure its legitimate place in the world. India started getting grudging respect only after Indian became a stronger economy (after 1991) and stronger military power ( after 1998).
India has to formulate a vision of its future among the comity of nations – strong but peaceful nation which uses its power not just to secure its borders but helps others, especially in Asia, to defend themselves. Its sphere of influence should not merely extend from Singapore to Aden but also include the Middle East, South East Asia and other parts of Asia. India should have a strong defense industry. Once the vision is clear, strategy will evolve to suit the vision.
( A letter sent to India Abroad,New York, commenting on a report on the book,Arming without aiming, in is issue dt.Sept.17,2010)
http://www.indiaabroad-digital.com/indiaabroad/20100917/?pg=7&pm=1&u1=friend
******
