What's new

'India can't have a Special Forces model like US does'

Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
5,052
Reaction score
-6
Country
India
Location
India
'India can't have a Special Forces model like US does'


12ss1.jpg


It has been reported that the Naresh Chandra Task Force has recommended that the Special Forces should be placed under the chairman of the chiefs of staff committee, who will have a tenure of two years. What is your comment on it? Will this recommendation be acceptable to the three forces?

Gen Katoch: The recommendation of the permanent chairman chiefs of staff committee is a euphuism putting the CDS into cold storage for next few years. But even as and when the CDS comes through, the bureaucracy has ensured that the politico-military connect is incomplete.

The government document has been cleverly drafted in that it says that as and when the CDS is appointed, whenever two service chiefs disagree, arbitration will be done by the MoD. To that end, even the CDS will hardly be a single point contact to the prime minister.

Special Forces need to be primarily employed strategically on politico-military missions. Such missions at times will be ordered directly by the political authority without reference to the military.

Moreover, our HQ integrated defence staff which was to fully integrate with the MoD has not been permitted to do so and instead came up as a separate headquarters. That is why the US model of special operations command is unlikely to be successful in India.

Special Forces need to be directly under the political authority.

This does not imply that all of what we are referring to as Special Forces be put under the prime minister. What we need to start with is just 250-300 special forces operatives, specialised for specified regions, which can be expanded subsequently on as required forces.

Obviously, the prime minister will require an advisory cell comprising advisers from intelligence agencies and Special Forces. The book will need to be read for the proposed set up and functioning. Special Forces have a covert role not only in irregular combat but also through information support operations, psychological operations, perception management, training friendly forces and other non-combat activities including economic, social and cultural, all of which require focused planning, cross-cultural communications, and preparation before the mission is launched.

The balance of what can termed as commando forces can be put under the permanent chairman chiefs of staff committee for better synergy, organisation, tasking, equipping etc. But, it must be ensured that this command is headed by and the HQ posted by Special Forces officers and not pseudo specialists who have never served in Special Forces -- as the army has attuned itself to.

Leaving them in the current state will amount to continuing the drift, for example, within the military, the special forces still do not have institutionalised system for real time/near real time intelligence, integral air/helicopter support, civilian support and the like. The ill-fated Jaffna University helicopter borne raid used four Mi-17 helicopters from four different air force helicopter units.

There will definitely be objections by services but is essential and if meeting the services requirements is ensured then their objections can be overcome. Major doctrinal change in a country like the USA too did not come about overnight.

In fact, inter-service integration virtually had to be forced down upon the military because of a series of incidents over the years like the failed Iranian hostage rescue attempt, the terrorist attack on Beirut resulting in large number of American casualties and similarly the problems of interoperability and yet again many casualties suffered during the US operations in Grenada.

Integrating them under permanent chairman COSC will also help relieve special forces troops from extraneous duties like some service chiefs and even army commanders using these specialist troops for personal protection duties (as politicians use the NSG), whereas services police personnel are capable of undertaking such tasks. Hopefully, the permanent chairman of COSC will also desist from using the for his personal protection.

Dutta: In the UK, Russia, Israel and the US, who have some of the finest Special Forces in the world, they report directly to the prime minister or the president. In India, which borrowed the Special Forces concept from the success of these countries, they have been tied up in such a bureaucratic hierarchy that they have been reduced to a point of criminal inefficiency. Special Forces are employed when the political leadership needs critical options during critical emergencies.

They are the ones who should have a direct linkage to the Special Forces instead of using the conventional military hierarchies such as chiefs of staff committee etc. That would prove to be a disastrous move in our opinion.

One talks of the covert action division of the intelligence agencies, the National Security Guard and the special forces of the armed forces. How do you distinguish their functions? How will they co-ordinate their operations?

Gen Katoch: If we had optimised covert actions capabilities we would not be in the state in which we are today on both the external and internal front. We have had continuous strategic intelligence failures since 1950s. What covert intelligence are we talking about? What a shame that The New York Times has to tell us that 11,000 Chinese have been milling around in Pakistan/*** and the foreign secretary asks the army for a detailed report instead of R&AW.

When the media has reported a year back that China has provided assault rifles manufacturing capabilities to Maoists, why have we not been able to locate and destroy them. The coordination of the armed forces Special Forces (read commando forces), NSG and SFF can be achieved, including with intelligence agencies by putting them together under the permanent chairman COSC.

Under what conditions can Special Forces operate against foreign targets in foreign territory?

Gen Katoch: The most important factor that deters the hierarchy from deploying our special forces abroad is the lack of understanding of their employment beyond direct attacks, raids and ambushes.

The fact is that such tasks have gone onto the backburner and have been replaced mainly by politico-military missions that may not entail physical attack at all. This is not understood by the hierarchy. We have failed to capitalise on this present day concept and hence are blind to happenings beyond our borders leave aside shaping the environment to India's favour, even as China and Pakistan are blatantly fanning our internal fires.

The last conventional war was fought between Russia and Georgia in 2005. This is an age of asymmetric and irregular warfare. Special Forces tasks are more in non-war period than during conventional war. These tasks are covert covering a span of spheres like information support operations, strategic intelligence, perception management, getting hold of fault-lines of the adversaries, building partner capacity to counter asymmetric war and the like.

Can Special Forces operate against Indian targets in Indian territory? Under what conditions? Will state governments agree to it?

Gen Katoch: Our aggravating internal situation is being simply glossed over. Example is the expanding arc of Maoist insurgency -- now even to Assam and Tripura though the erstwhile home minister said in 2010 that the Maoist problem will be over in next 2-3 years. The Kerala headquartered Popular Front of India nurtured by Al Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Tayiba picked up arms against the Indian State years back -- as reported by R&AW and IB.

Four of their cadres were apprehended in Kupwara (North Kashmir) two years back trying to exfiltrate into Pakistan. Yet PFI does not figure in the MHA official list of 35 banned terrorist organisations.

The threat from PFI in the soft belly of south India magnifies if we are prepared to discern the infiltration of Al Qaeda and LTTE amongst the 77,000 foreign employees and 33,000 illegal immigrants in Maldives; cumulative terrorist threat being ignored because of vote-bank politics.

When P Chidambaram proposed the National Counter Terrorism Centre, he also proposed a separate ministry of internal security, giving clear indication that the MHA in its present shape is not geared to the challenge in totality. We need a strong NCTC but that too is bogged down.

The basic problem is that we have not been able to delink 'law and order' from terrorism and insurgency.

Technically, we are still dealing with the Maoist insurgency akin to 'law and order' which is a state subject. The magnitude of the threat (with external links) requires that the MHA/MIS (Ministry of Internal Security) deals with the issue centrally, with a 24x7 operations room, an effective NCTC linked with similar state level SCTCs linked through the NATGRID, and using the special forces target the jugular of the terrorists/insurgents including their leadership.

The reservations of states is for the reasons described by M K Dhar in his book 'Open Secrets -- India's Intelligence Unveiled wherein he categorically stated that irrespective of which government is in power in India, the entire intelligence effort is towards how to do down the opposition.

Dutta: In my view the Special Forces should ideally be kept away from internal security duties. They can participate in operations and help train internal security forces, but they should keep away from such operations. Instead, the capability must be developed by the police forces and the STF of Chhattisgarh Police or the COBRA battalions of the CRPF are steps in the right direction.

Former Special Forces personnel can be added to these units for advice, training and limited leadership.

With compared to China, America or Russia where does India stand in raising its Special Forces? Are we capable to fight modern war in 21st century with help of Special Forces?

Gen Katoch: China, America and Russia are employing their special forces strategically. China has cleverly deployed PLA serving and veteran personnel including Special Forces operatives in the development projects she is undertaking globally, as also in our neighbouring countries.

China developed links with Al Qaeda and Taliban more than a decade back and was already training Taliban even as the US was invading Afghanistan in 2001.

US Special Forces are operating in some 200 countries, including India. Their undeclared tasks include conducting proactive, sustained "man hunting" and disruption operations globally, and employ unconventional warfare against state sponsored terrorism and trans-national terrorist groups globally.

Russia too has deployed its special forces similarly. Special Forces do not create resistance movements but advice, train and assist resistance movements already in existence. They are ideally suited to control fault lines of the adversaries without any signatures or with ambiguous signatures.

That is what Pakistan (mother of global terrorism) is doing today through her proxies and China has joined hands to destabilise us internally. We must employ our special forces strategically to control enemy fault lines.

What are your recommendations to the government to fine-tune the Special Forces? What are must-do-things to make it capable to play part in future world order and in resolution of conflicts?

Gen Katoch: Over the years, irregular forces have proved of great strategic value that can hardly be deterred through conventional power but in India we appear to not acknowledge this. Consequently, we have failed to create deterrence against irregular forces relying only on diplomacy, which itself is not fully effective not having been sensitised to military, particularly to the advantages of special forces.

Special Forces are a vital element of national power, possessing enormous freedom of action and should be fruitfully employed to successfully meet future challenges. There is urgent need to develop publicised overt capabilities and deniable covert capabilities as deterrence against irregular war thrust upon us and the will to selectively demonstrate it to ensure its effectiveness.

We need to create macro conditions for Special Forces through measures like a national vision, national level doctrine for employment of Special Forces, joint organisations and integrated intelligence support and the like. The must-do-things are discussed in the book.

http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-sh...t-dutta-on-indian-special-forces/20130509.htm
 
What a shame that The New York Times has to tell us that 11,000 Chinese have been milling around in Pakistan/*** and the foreign secretary asks the army for a detailed report instead of R&AW.



Proof our leaders have no strateic sense. Pick a kid from the streets and they will teach you how to survive!
 
Gen Katoch: China, America and Russia are employing their special forces strategically. China has cleverly deployed PLA serving and veteran personnel including Special Forces operatives in the development projects she is undertaking globally, as also in our neighbouring countries.

China developed links with Al Qaeda and Taliban more than a decade back and was already training Taliban even as the US was invading Afghanistan in 2001.

China is training Taliban?:blink:
 
I dont completely agree with the authors of this book and here is why...

Firstly we dont need to compare ourselves with USA,UK and Russia currently as their area of interest is far more greater than ours.We have more problems to look after internally than externally.We cant deploy SF operators in 200 countries and neither is there any need.

I think and hope most of the Indians would agree that we are developing at quite a good pace and in 20 years we would be a very strong nation.But we dont want to do the role of a superpower.Neither will it be in our capabilties nor are we interested.We just want to keep the citizens of our country safe.

Hence there is no point of foreign deployments outside our region and this is where i am unable to understand what the authors of the book are trying to convey.I think we have quite a good SF capability(comparing to our adversaries) and SF for me is a unit which is a force multiplier and gives you the advantage either in a conventionar war or in the war against terror.

Here is what the roles of various SFs in India are:-

Army SF:-They are the bearers of the fight against terrorism now and will remain so till the end of this decade.Handling Kashmir and North-East pretty well.Incase of a war they will hit enemy stratergic location and will fight 80% of SF ops in any war.

Naval SF:-Responsible for Anti Piracy ops..get deployed in Kashmir on a small scale to get some experience.In future will be reponsible for martime ops and may work with Marine Infantry we might be raising.

AF SF:-No field deployments currently..In a war will be responsible for Pilot rescue and guiding bombers to their target.

SFF:-Top secret unit complrised of Army SF and will work with Army SF incase of war.

These are as far as our SF units go who will fight the war.

Now the authors are trying to say that these units should be doing the job which SG or RAW's hit squad is doing and i dont agree.I think we should keep the military units to military roles.RAW and SG are more than enough to take care of any external threats.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The SF of a country is as good as the technology they possess.The Osama Bin Laden raid wont have been possible without the technological edge USA possesses...and i dare say that after getting dropped by the heli at Abottabad you didnt require a "Seal team 6" to kill Osama.Any SF unit in this world would have achieved that.The problem was reaching there using stealth and other technologies.

We are also in the process of modernising and it takes time.I am sure the authors have more access than me to info but man i am very very very impressed by the way we are modernising our SF units.We have achieved so much in so less time.All that needs to be done is to make a proper system or a proper command which has everything it wishes for.
 
In my view, the author seems to be all over the place, in describing the role of special forces. Is he talking about military special forces only? Seems not, he is conflating that role and the role of intelligence agents/operatives. When he talks about US special forces operating in "200 countries including India", I think he is confusing CIA agents and US special forces. I am pretty sure that there are no green berets operating in India. They are the US army's special forces. Covert specialists working undercover do not get classified as "special forces", but as spies or agents. And that is done by the CIA, maybe by personnel of its special activities division, but also by civilians. (Members of the SAD are recruited from elite special forces, but when they work as spies, they do not work as military special forces.)

The author himself is contributing to the general chaotic (mis)understanding of a military special forces' roles and mandates, when he talks about all these different activities under the same umbrella. How can we expect the civilian leadership to come up with a clear cut mandate for special forces, when some of the former luminaries of spec forces, like this author, are themselves so uncertain about it?

The role of military special forces has to be made clearer, and we have to stop treating SF units as elite infantry, and sending them into battles that they were not raised for. However, the distinction between military spec forces and civilian intelligence agencies should also be maintained.

From what I know of the ghataks, it is my opinion that their numbers should be increased, and maybe they have to work in larger units as battlefield level special forces or elite infantry, like the rangers battalions in the USA. That will free up our real special forces to do real spec ops. Having a platoon of ghataks in every infantry battalion (like they do now) is good, but maybe there should also be companies or a battalion comprised entirely of ghataks, like the battalions of the 75th ranger regiment.
 
As @janon and @COLDHEARTED AVIATOR have already said there are many inconsistencies and inaccuracies present in this article.


Also what the author fails to account for is the effect the events of 9/11 had on the US and the West's utilisation of Special forces against terrorist and other unconventional threats. Prior to 2001 one couldn't have made the case that the US and Western SOFs were used in any radical way or took much of their leadership from the political establishment. 9/11 and the subsequent "War on Terror" has complety transformed the way the West and the US go about their business wrt the implementation of SOFs and covert assets. India is simply a decade or so behind where mindsets are concerned and it may take a major disaster to shake things up or it make take a gradual reform process which the Indian military is seemingly starting to implement now with their version of SOCOM.


Wrt China and Pakistan and their use of SOFs, I can't see how they score any better than India on this front. Arguably the ISI has done a fine job for its country as far as covert ops are concerned but that's separate and delicate area.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wrt China and Pakistan and their use of SOFs, I can't see how they score any better than India on this front. Arguably the ISI has done a fine job for its country as far as covert ops are concerned but that's separate and delicate area.

Moreover it is the ISI which has done the damage not SSG.So the author should not get confused on the role of a Intelligence agency and a SF unit.

But having said that we need a SOCOM with a Intelligence unit,C130s and other infrastructure supporting it and this needs to be done immediately.
 
Back
Top Bottom