Sri Advani's speech

SPEECH BY SHRI LK ADVANI JI ON RELEASE OF THE FIRST ISSUE OF THE CHANAKYA JOURNAL OF CHANAKYA CENTRE FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES (CCSS) AT ASHOK HOTEL, NEW DELHI AT 1100 HRS ON 12TH OCTOBER 2015 Sri TN Chaturvedi, Sri Naresh Chandra, Sri Vijai Kapoor, Sri Shekhar Dutt, Sri DC Pathak, Dr SD Pradhan, Excellencies, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, It is a matter of great pleasure for me to be here with you all at the release of the first issue of the Chanakya Journal of the Chanakya Centre for Strategic Studies. At the outset I would like to express my appreciation to the members of this think tank for bringing out a quarterly journal comprising articles on security and foreign policy contributed by wellknown experts not only from India but also from abroad. I have gone through the first issue and found the articles extremely useful for clear understanding of the complexities of the current security environment. These articles not merely throw light on different dimensions of challenges but also highlight opportunities that are available before the policy makers. The main objective of the Chanakya Centre is to bring views of experts to the notice of the policy makers and opinion shapers for their consideration through their journal on a continuing basis, which is distributed to all concerned free of cost. This is indeed a noble initiative. I am sure this journal would be of immense value to the policy makers. I thank the organisers for inviting me to this function. In fact, this is a precious moment for me as I note with great satisfaction that the main inspiration for this effort came from the Group of Minister’s (GOM) recommendations, which submitted its report in 2001 and was accepted by the Cabinet. The GOM was constituted after the Kargil conflict to review the national security system in its entirety and in particular, to consider the recommendations of the Kargil Review Committee. This was the first ever comprehensive review of the entire security apparatus undertaken since Independence. For the assistance of the Group of Ministers four tasks Forces were constituted. These Tasks Forces comprised the best and brilliant experts mostly from outside the government. This was considered necessary in view of the recommendation of the Kargil Review Committee that the proposed review should not be undertaken by an ‘over-burdened bureaucracy’ but by an independent body of credible experts. The mandate of the GOM was substantially wider than the Kargil Review Committee. The GoM was, inter alia, required to review the national security system in its entirety and to formulate specific proposals for implementation. The GOM reviewed the entire security apparatus in a systematic manner. The reports of the Task Forces were referred to the concerned administrative ministries for their comments, so that these could be taken into account by the GoM. In the light of these comments, the recommendations of the Task Forces were processed in several Inter-Ministerial Group (IMG) meetings, chaired by the Cabinet Secretary, for the benefit of the GoM. The GoM also held detailed discussions on the subject with the three Service Chiefs to ascertain their views on the Task Force reports in general and issues concerning Defence Management, in particular. Similarly, the GoM had detailed discussions with the Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri, concerned DRDO officials and Secretary (Defence Production) on issues impinging on Defence Research, relating to the recommendations of the Task Force on Defence Management. The chairpersons of the four Task Forces were associated by the GoM in several subsequent deliberations, to clarify a plethora of issues thrown up as a result of IMG discussions and also to get a clearer understanding for the rationale of certain recommendations. The GOM noted that the traditional concept of national security had undergone fundamental changes over the years. It was no longer synonymous with sufficient military strength to defend the nation and its interests. In today's world, military might alone does not guarantee either sovereignty or security. The more realistic and comprehensive approach to national security also includes economic strength, internal cohesion and technological prowess. The fundamental security of the individual citizen includes security of life and property, food security, energy security, clean environment, education and health. A strong sense of nationalism and good governance also form an integral part of national security; as does the ability to retain political and economic sovereignty and autonomy of decision making, in an era of globalisation and increasing economic interdependence. Both the external and internal environment are changing at an incredibly fast pace, with developments in nuclear weapons and missiles, increasing cross-border terrorism, the emergence of non-state actors, the growth of Islamic fundamentalism, the narcoticsarms nexus, illegal migration and left wing extremism, gravely impacting upon the security of the country. The rapid technological developments underway at the same time not only facilitate these events by reducing our reaction time but add entirely new dimensions of threats and challenges, such as the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) and offensive/ defensive information warfare. 

The GOM had also observed that the traditional structures and processes for the management of national security are under considerable stress. Not only are most of them over 50 years old but their effectiveness has also, over time, been attenuated. These need to be suitably restructured and strengthened, to cope with the new and emerging challenges facing us in the areas of Intelligence, Internal Security, Border and Defence Management, so as to help develop a more efficient and cost effective national security system for the 21st century. Some of the conclusions of the GOM are true even today. The GOM had concluded that the new strategic environment would be affected by technological developments in a more fundamental manner than ever before. Although technology has been a harbinger of change throughout history, the sheer scope and pace of current technological change is unprecedented. The revolution in Information Technology (IT) which is sweeping the world has deepened the process of globalisation. The role of the media in creating, shaping and changing perceptions will continue to expand. In the military sector, the technology-driven Information Warfare (IW) and the RMA will have a dramatic impact in the coming decades. Developments in communications and space technologies are shaping everyday life and economy in a far more fundamental fashion than is ordinarily realised. The battle field of the future will be vastly different from the past - it would be nonlinear in nature, with real-time surveillance, integrated Command, Control, Communications, Computer, Intelligence and Information (C4I2) assets, target acquisition and highly lethal precision weapon systems. The future battlefield in our context is likely to be more digitized and transparent and would experience an exponential increase in the deployment of electronic devices, signalling the growing primacy of the electromagnetic spectrum. The future conflicts would be dominated by a wide variety of platforms and delivery systems with increased ranges and accuracy, as well as terminally-guided and precision-guided munitions. GOM further concluded that while India needs to ensure credible nuclear deterrence to prevent the possibility of a nuclear misadventure by its potential adversaries, it has to simultaneously maintain adequate and duly modernised conventional forces which are properly managed, led and equipped to take advantage of the RMA and which can take care of any possible conventional conflicts. Our current security environment does not provide us any comfort. India faces multiple and complex threats and challenges to its security from the land, sea and air. Since Independence, five wars have been imposed on us - four with Pakistan and one with China. Many of the insurgencies faced by India have been fuelled or drawn sustenance from abroad. The emergence of non-state terrorist actors like ISIS and the rise of their international influence is worrisome. Much of their activity is clandestine and outside the accepted international norms. International and state-sponsored terrorism, often motivated by fundamentalist ideologies, backed by secretive but efficient financial networks, use of IT, clandestine access to chemical-biological and nuclear materials and illicit drug trafficking, has emerged as a major threat to international stability. They pose threats to multi-religious, multi-ethnic and pluralistic societies. India is at the receiving end of these violent elements and is likely to remain a target of international terrorism in the future. Strategies need to be evolved to counter the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) terrorism as well as cyber-terrorism; the latter especially against infrastructural and economic assets such as banking, power, water and transportation sectors.

The GOM had made about 350 recommendations for improving our preparedness to face challenges which are growing rapidly. Some of them were significant like a new intelligence wing for all the armed forces called Defence Intelligence Agency, a technical intelligence support agency called National Technical Research Organisation, a new platform for intelligence sharing and coordination called Multi Agency Centre at the Centre as also Subsidiary Multi Agency Centres in each State. It also recommended improving the disaster relief management system. At the borders “one border one force” principal was recommended for better accountability and each force was asked to have an intelligence wing of its own for operations. For defence management, we recommended a number of measures. In view of our dynamic and rapidly changing security environment, it was recommended that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) needed to be suitably restructured and strengthened. The GOM had also recommended closer integration of Armed Forces in the Defence Ministry. It was suggested that the Service Headquarters should be designated as "Integrated Headquarters" of the MoD. The creation of Chief of Defence was also suggested to ensure the required “Jointness” in the Armed Forces, to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the planning process through Intra and Inter-Service Prioritisation and to provide Single-Point Military Advice to the Government. This recommendation has so far remained unimplemented. During our review we noted that sufficient public information was not available. It was suggested that structures and processes should be developed to keep the public informed of vital national issues. In such a sphere Think Tanks in association with Government can play a significant role of keeping both the public and policy makers informed. I am sure that the Chanakya Centre would play this role effectively. I was also happy to see that Sri Shekhar Dutt has written a book that focuses on several topical issues. Sri Dutt has long experience in defence matters. He himself has served in the armed forces and was Defence Secretary as also Dy. National Security Advisor. His views would also help policy makers in understanding complicated defence, security and development issues.