India - Modernising the Infantry
"The least spectacular arm yet without which you can nothing at all".
A former Director General of the Infantry makes a strong plea in this
article for speeding up the modernisation of this critical teeth arm.
Since independence the infantry has remained the arm of first call by
the nation; be it conventional, sub-conventional or internal security
operations. It must be given the best personal weapons and equipment
and these must be made available in an operationally realistic time
frame. Five focus areas identified for capability development of the
infantry are Lethality, Survivability, Mobility, Situational Awareness
and Sustainability. Modernisation must not be delayed by promises
of developing equipment that cannot be met in the time frame desired.
He highlights some practical difficulties in procuring simple and low
cost items that call for suitable changes in the DPP.
This article is published with the kind permission of "Defence and Security Alert (DSA) Magazine" New Delhi-India
Infantry is the largest and the
most premium arm of the Indian
Army. It encompasses within
its fold specialised infantry like
Airborne troops, the Special Forces
and Scouts battalions besides the
Amphibious forces and a large chunk
of the Rashtriya Rifles. The Mechanised
infantry went under the mechanised
forces fold over a decade back. With
close to 400 battalions, the infantry
constitutes almost one third of the
Indian Army. Since independence the
infantry has remained the arm of first
call by the nation; be it conventional,
sub-conventional or internal security
operations. It has performed
commendably in all operations since
independence and has an unparalleled
record of valour and sacrifice in the
service of the nation.
In sum, while the
Infantry continues to
go about its tasks with
its traditional devotion
and commitment, its
modernisation needs to be
pursued with ever greater
vigour and determination.
There has to be a well
deliberated General
Staff Policy Statement
backed by detailed
philosophies for individual
components of the
modernisation programme
like small arms, anti-tank
weapons, surveillance /
battlefield transparency,
communications etc. to
guide the process. One
hopes for necessary
changes in the DPP
to facilitate easier
procurement of some basic
and low-cost equipment
for the infantry soldier
The current and emerging regional
security scenario coupled with a
fluid and potentially volatile internal
security situation, call for maintaining
the highest levels of operational
preparedness at all times to deal with
any contingency. Even as the contours
of future conventional wars undergo
a paradigm shift with enhanced
battlefield transparency, greater
accuracy and lethality of fire power,
higher tempo of operations and shorter,
more intense conflicts, infantry will
continue to play a vital battle winning
role in the combined all arms and
joint operations environment of the
future. The infantry also remains the
primary instrument for dealing with
asymmetric, sub-conventional and
emerging hybrid war scenarios, more
so in view of the persistent challenge
of a proxy war being waged against
the country for the last over two
decades. Needless to mention then the
overriding importance that maintaining
the highest levels of operational
preparedness of the infantry and its
modernisation assume.
Even as the army determinedly
pursues its modernisation goals, which
have today fallen behind by almost two
perspective plan periods with the tenth
plan procurements yet to substantially
materialise and only a few months
remaining for the eleventh plan to draw
to a close, it is becoming increasingly
difficult to explain to the infantrymen
in the field as to why their low-cost
and elementary requirements of
equipment and weapons cannot be met
in an operationally viable time frame.
There are continuing deficiencies in
War Establishment equipment profile
of infantry battalions on Model 4B
(Modified), which was promulgated in
2003. The dynamics of modernisation
in general and infantry modernisation
in particular bear analysis and urgent
speeding up.
Modernisation dynamics
Modernisation of the infantry is
being pursued in consonance with
the infantry vision, “To be optimally
configured to conduct operations at
short notice across the entire spectrum
of conflict prevention, conflict and
post-conflict activities both within and
outside the region.” Five focus areas
identified for capability development of
the infantry are Lethality, Survivability,
Mobility, Situational Awareness and
Sustainability. The current dimensions
of modernising the infantry encompass
making up the deficiencies of
Model 4B (Modified), developing
enhanced capability of Ghatak platoons,
pursuing the flagship F-INSAS
programme, modernisation of the
PARA and PARA (SF), equipping infantry battalions for amphibious
role and certain other procurements
as part of the ongoing process of
capability development of infantry. Of
the dynamics, first and foremost what
needs to be appreciated is that the
role and nature of tasks performed by
the infantry inherently demand that
the infantryman himself is the most
important weapon of the infantry. The
basic equipment of the infantryman
that enhances his battle worthiness,
from simple low cost items like elbow
and knee pads to body armour and
lightweight individual equipment
and sighting systems on his personal
weapons that help him acquire a
target quickly and engage it accurately
thus assume great importance.
Unfortunately, however, the elaborate
Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP)
being virtually the same for acquiring
a knee or elbow pad and a tank and
possibly an aircraft, the infantry has
remained deprived of even such simple
items. Some related aspects are low cost
and size - while most of the items needed
by the infantry are low cost, the size of
the arm being the largest necessitates
larger numbers, which impact the
overall cost of procurement raising the
level of competent financial authority
required to sanction purchases of
simple low cost items. Even so the
overall cost of infantry procurements
is relatively lower than other arms
and since the effort required at various
levels to process a proposal is the same,
the temptation is to process high value
procurements on priority because of
their favourable impact on budgetary
spending. We definitely need to be
looking at suitable changes in the DPP,
which factor the cost of an item rather
than the total value of procurement into
consideration for the purpose of both,
simplifying the procurement procedure
for such items as well as the competent
financial authority for sanctioning
the same. Another aspect which has
adversely impacted on modernisation
all around is the prevailing
‘anti-corruption’ environment in the
country, which has virtually made the
modernisation process a hostage to
the requirements of probity. While the
services wholeheartedly support the
need to keep the acquisition process
absolutely clean and corruption free
(it can be nobody’s case that probity
and transparency in procurements
be compromised in any manner), the
ongoing inquiries and environment
have definitely created a sense of insecurity leading to a ‘play safe’
attitude especially amongst those in
the final decision making loop. This
leads to inordinate delays and cost
overruns that are very injurious to our
overall security. This has manifested
itself in absurd interpretations of the
DPP in some cases leading to avoidable
delays and falling through of even fully
matured proposals after over a year’s or
several years’ toil at various levels. The
‘letter’ of DPP should not assume more
importance than the ‘spirit’ and there will always be limits to our writing
good English, which caters to all
eventualities. Can we really visualise
all such eventualities in the early stages
of a proposal’s long journey through
the labyrinthine requirements of the
DPP and multitude of agencies, which
are involved! And while the provision
for waivers exists, it is subject to the
aforementioned probity syndrome.
One often gets the feeling that sincere
and upright officers, especially in the
Ministry, would rather avoid an innings
in procurement related jobs and actions
of those who cannot, tend to be guided
more by the thought of avoiding an
inquiry, now or later, rather than any
concern for modernisation goals or
enhancing operational preparedness.
A generally prevailing environment
of diffused accountability and the
ease of shifting the blame for delays
or inefficiency on to lower rungs in
the chain of procurement allow those
with such a mindset to ride the system.
Notwithstanding the above, energetic
efforts are on to create higher levels of
sensitivity towards operational needs
and modernisation goals. To be fair,
some structural inadequacies relating
to resources available for processing
of proposals at various levels need
addressing and should come about
as part of the endeavour presently
underway for ‘transformation of the
army’. Also, a reassuring environment,
which generates the confidence that
upright officers will not be hauled
over coals over decisions taken in
the line of duty certainly needs to be
created.
![]() |
Unfair comparisons are also at times
made about the relatively sluggish
pace of processing of army proposals
as compared to the other two services. The inventory, its diversity and
huge size and a far larger number
of proposals definitely add to the
complexity of procurements by the
army. The country’s military industrial
complex comprising the Ordnance
Factories Board (OFB), the Defence
Public Sector Undertakings (DPSus),
both under the Department of Defence
Production (DDP) in the Ministry of
Defence and the Defence Research and
Development Organisation (DRDO)
play a very significant and dominant
role in the entire modernisation process,
with the focus on indigenisation of
defence production. Their overlapping
roles and responsibilities, degree of
accountability, capability, competence
and efficiency, pricing, responsiveness,
quality and ability to deliver on
time, merit an honest and genuine
introspection. And, last but not the
least of the players are the vendors,
some of whom have begun to exploit
the DPP unfairly for their narrow
commercial ends leading to avoidable
diversion of effort towards replying
to their motivated representations and
consequent procurement delays. The
system needs to come down heavily to
curb this emerging tendency amongst
the defaulting vendors. A system of
blacklisting the vendors who default on
the integrity clause does exist but this
has also led to a ‘play safe’ approach for
future procurements from such vendors
and consequent delays. With the
judicial process being time consuming,
what we perhaps need to consider is
a system of imposing heavy penalties
instead of blacklisting especially since
some of these vendors happen to be
the only ones in the market to meet the
requirements of some operationally
critical equipment.
Approach to modernisation
Modernisation of the infantry
needs to be guided by its basic
characteristics of self reliance and
mobility, technological upgradation,
ensuring that individual soldier is not
encumbered unnecessarily and weight
carried by him is kept manageable.
His capability to perform effectively in
the net-centric, combined arms, joint
operations battlefield environment
of the future needs to be developed.
These aspects, as per media reports,
have been incorporated in the F-INSAS
programme, which is the flagship
programme of not only the infantry
but the Indian Army. The three basic
weapons of the infantry, the carbine,
assault rifle and the light machine
gun are due for replacement as part
of this programme. The replacement
of the carbine has been delayed for
long partly due to the inability of our
military industrial complex to provide
an adequate suitable indigenous
alternative in the last over five years.
We need to be open minded and
innovative in our approach to meet the
small arms requirement of not only the
infantry and the army but also of the
para military and police forces,
especially since the latter are now involved in battling the Maoists. It is
an open secret that leaves aside the
paramilitary and the police, even the
army today does not have an inventory
of small arms, which can be called
worthy of one of the largest armies of
the world and that too when some of the
smaller neighbours boast far superior
weapons in that category. Whatever
be the reasons, the indigenous INSAS
family of weapons has fallen far short
of the operational requirements as
well as the aspirations of troops even
after almost a decade and a half. The
nation owes it to the infantry soldier
who is required to unflinchingly make
the supreme sacrifice in close quarter
combat with the enemy with only his
personal weapon, to provide him a
quality personal weapon that in the
very least inspires confidence in him
and bestows on him the ability to get
the better of his adversary in battle.
While the need for indigenisation is
well understood it has to be done in an
operationally viable time frame. Instead
of taking decades to reinvent the wheel,
will the system do better to establish a
state-of-the-art small arms
manufacturing facility now that all
three key small arms are due for
replacement, which will meet the
requirements of both, the army
and paramilitary and police forces?
Keeping in view the inordinate delays
that have occurred in producing
acceptable versions of these small
arms, it may now be the operationally
optimal solution to set up plants to
manufacture state-of-the-art versions
under license. Is it not surprising that
when manufacturing facilities for
state-of-the-art cars are allowed to be
established in the country then why
do we shy away from providing our
soldiers the essential wherewithal to
not only come out victorious in any
battlefield engagement but also to
improve their survivability on the
emerging highly lethal battlefield of
the future. Indigenisation is highly
desirable but the products have to be
made available in a realistic time frame.
The Sten Machine Carbine (SMC) for
instance was found to be sub-optimal as
far back as the Sri Lanka operations in
1987! It was grossly underpowered and
prone to accidental discharge. Today,
some 24 years later we still have not
been able to give a replacement SMC
to our soldiers. Half-indigenisation
inspired by transfer of technology as
part of the defence procurement process
is also encountering some difficulties
with constraints on absorption of
technology transferred. Genuine
and meaningful indigenisation will
remain a distant dream unless there
is an effort at switching focus of
defence research from immediate and
short term requirements to long term
defence needs. A well coordinated
effort is needed to optimise the existing
dedicated human resource and some
excellent research facilities. In the
interim modernisation must not be
delayed by promises of developing
equipment that cannot be met in the
time frame desired.
Some questions prevail in some
quarters of the environment on
the viability and desirability of the
F-INSAS programme. Some of these
have to do more with the semantics and
designation that inspires some hard core
infantrymen to ask if an infantryman
should or indeed can be transformed
into a system. The programme has five
sub-systems-weapons, which is
basically focused on personal weapons
of the infantry soldier, body armour
and individual equipment (BAIE),
which as the name suggests is focused
on body armour and lightweight
modular equipment for the soldier,
target acquisition that is focused on
surveillance equipment and weapon
sights, communication system, which
seeks to upgrade the radio sets to
software defined single and dual band
radios and the computer system, which
will be selectively provided to meet the
requirement of making the infantry
effective in a net-centric environment.
Notwithstanding the programme
designation, bulk of the programme is
geared towards modernising the basic
weapons and equipment of the infantry
soldier to empower and enhance
his battlefield efficiency in both,
networked as well as non-networked
environments. It does not detract from
the ‘primacy’ of an infantry soldier being
the ‘primary infantry weapon’ even as
it provides him systems support for
enhanced and fully enabled operational
effectiveness when necessary. Request
for information (RFIs) for most of the
equipment under the programme have
been hosted on the web and several
proposals are apparently in more
advanced stages.
Proposals for enhancing the
capability of infantry battalion Ghatak
platoons were mooted in the aftermath
of 26/11. Two years down the line
some of the important proposals
for equipment like door breaching
grenade, breaching ammunition,
sub-machine gun and sniper rifle
may well be near fructification.
Some important tenth plan
modernisation proposals for the
Special Forces have since fructified.
The guiding philosophy for their
modernisation needs to be obviously
benchmarked against the best in the
world and definitely a shade better
than any other hue of Special Forces
within the country. We must always
remember that in any situation the
Armed Forces remain the last resort
option, which simply cannot fail the
nation in any contingency.
Infantry tasked for amphibious
role constitutes an emerging strategic
capability and needs due priority and
attention. While the army has more
than made up for lack of equipment
through its innovativeness, training
and a very strong sense of commitment
to any assigned task, it remains the
moral obligation of the State to provide
the best for its Armed Forces.
In sum, while the infantry continues
to go about its tasks with its traditional
devotion and commitment, its
modernisation needs to be pursued with
ever greater vigour and determination.
There has to be a well deliberated
General Staff Policy Statement backed
by detailed philosophies for individual
components of the modernisation
programme like small arms, anti-tank
weapons, surveillance / battlefield
transparency, communications etc.
to guide the process. One hopes for
necessary changes in the DPP to
facilitate easier procurement of some
basic and low-cost equipment for the
infantry soldier. Coupled with this
an attitudinal change and greater
sensitivity to making up the operational
capability shortfalls will, of course, be
welcome.
The writer was commissioned into the Fifth
Battalion of the Third Gorkha Rifles in
November 1971 on the eve of Indo-Pak War
1971 and saw action with his battalion in
the Kargil Sector. He was Deputy General
Officer Commanding of an infantry division
in the deserts during Op Parakram and Chief
of Staff of the Srinagar based Chinar Corps.
He was Chief of Staff of the Jaipur based
South Western Command before taking over
as Director General Infantry in March 2010
from where he superannuated in April 2011.
Defence and Security Alert (DSA
Defence and Security Alert (DSA) magazine is the only ISO 9001:2008 certified, premier world class, new wave monthly magazine which features paradigm changing in-depth analyses on defence, security, safety and surveillance, focusing on developing and strategic future scenarios in India and around the world.
Last Updated (Saturday, 28 April 2012 12:31)
| See also | |










