HUNT0810

IAF's concerns are not trivial. If they were- MoD would have overruled them a long time ago. Most certainly the PMO, which heralded the pathbreaking reform by creating the office of CDS and Dept Of Military affairs (DMA). We see a surge of Naval veterans rushing in to criticize what the CAS said recently. Brothers in OG join in enthusiastically. They make it out a case of Navy and Army agreeing but IAF playing a spoil sport. Lets consider some facts: 1. If India was to to go to full fledged war with either China or Pakistan or both simultaneously- all the IAF Sqns including all the enablers (AWACS, AEWC, Refuelers, EW support) would be involved. There is no question of distribution of assets- it would be all in. Also, the IAF assts could be re/deployed amongst theaters in matter of hours. Whereas in case of IA and IN, it is unlikely that the entire force could even be mobilized in that time. It is also unlikely that all the key strike elements will be engaged in all the scenarios. 2. Whether the war is over land or sea, IAF would be involved in enabling IA and IN. Whereas, the IN can do very little to support IA in case of purely land centric conflict and vice versa. It makes eminent sense for the two services to agree to theaterization. There is no conflict over resources and area of ops. They get to keep what they have, and fight how they do now. There is no challenge of coordination or resource sharing with the other service. 3. IAF stands out as rare dissenter as the issue of resource sharing and method of resource sharing is critical to how IAF would fight. 4. Let there be theaters, with nominated TC. There is no need for them to be overlapping. Army can lead the land theaters, 2 or 3, which can be geographically earmarked. Navy can have maritime theater, extending from our shoreline, the outer limits determined by our national resources and our strategic ambition. As such there is very little overlap between the two (land and sea). Let there be only one theater iro employment of air power- entire Indian territory. Air defence, air space management and conduct of air offensive/defensive operations be controlled by this theater 5. Each war/conflict would have directives issued by the political leadership. COSC led by CDS would convert those to military directives. Thereafter the force application must be synergized under a join fire plan created by a joint staff. COSC would nominate the lead TC. The resources required for the campaign would be assigned by the joint force HQ. As per the proposal sent by Gen Chauhan to the MoD, which carries consent of all including IAF- creation of a joint force HQs responsible for resource allocation and joint war planning, is proposed. 6. The assumption that Air HQs want to control air assets, to the detriment of joint effort is not true. Joint effort would be synergised at the Joint HQs, under the guidance of COSC. Joint fire plan would be created by the joint staff. Nominated TC would be assigned the resources required. This plan looks different from the clean organogram created by US and China model; however, it is more reflective of our requirements, challenges and more importantly resources.