M A I N   N E W S

Service chiefs for role in CMG
Tribune News Service

NEW DELHI, Jan 6 — The Chief of Army Staff, Gen V.P. Malik today said that the planning for all future contingencies should be done with the involvement of all three services.

In his valedictory speech at the national seminar on “The challenge of limited war: Parameteres and options”, read in his absentia by Major Gen V.G. Patanker, ADG Perspective Planning, the Chief of Army Staff while pointing out that there was a greater likelihood of limited wars in the future than that of all-out or general wars, said it was important that the three services be part of all contingency planning.

In what can be considered as a pointer to the three service chiefs having been kept out of the Crisis Management Group (CMG) formed to handle the recent Indian Airlines IC 814 hijacking, he said even if one or more service was not involved at the outset, contingency planning must include all services. “It is not possible to outline the exact contours of any war with great deal of certainty but what I am sure is that planning for all future contingencies should be joint,” he said.

General Malik said there was a greater likelihood of limited wars in the future. The rationale for limited wars was economic considerations, risk of high casualties, international pressure and the nuclear factor.

Also the limited wars could take place with little warning. It was axiomatic, therefore, that we would have to be better prepared and at a higher state of readiness than hither-to-fore. “ I feel, therefore, that security should rightfully be given due consideration in the formulation of our policies, particularly, foreign policy,” he said.

General Malik said surprise and unpredictability were basic elements of any war. Therefore, “notwithstanding the trend towards limited wars, it would be prudent for the nation to remain operationally prepared for the entire spectrum of war, from proxy war to an all-out war.”

Limited war was characterised by limitations, which tend to control its conduct and space. It could be limited in time, geographical area, or force level. In the Indian perspective, when we talk of a limited war, it would range from the kind we have been engaged in on the icy heights of Saltoro Ridge in Siachen since the 80s, the Kargil war in the recent past to future wars, which could be fought by us in confined sectors along our long frontiers, he said.

There was also a linkage between deterrence and escalation. We were able to keep the Kargil war limited primarily due to nuclear as well as conventional deterrence. Deterrence had many ingredients wherein the capability to wage a successful conventional war was the most important.

In fact war might well remain limited because of credible deterrence.General Malik said the whole scope and conduct of limited war would be governed by the “end state” desired by the side that precipitated it. It would, thereafter, follow the well-known “ends-ways-means” loop.

The escalation ladder would be carefully climbed in a controlled ascent by both protagonists. In exercising such control, politico-diplomatic factors would play an important part. Military operations, diplomacy and domestic environment would have to be orchestrated with fine judgement of a successful decisive outcome. Here we see once again the close relationship between security policy and foreign policy with the need for the former to lead the latter.

“All that I have stated so far was evident in the way the Kargil war was brought to a successful culminating point. Though Pakistan escalated it from the proxy war level, we tackled it at the level of a limited war. Politico-military-diplomatic aspects were carefully continuously monitored and contingency plans evolved by all the three services”, he said.