Army likely to replace the ITBP along LAC with China

[kseeker]

Army likely to replace the Indo Tibetan Border Police along LAC with China: Sources - IBNLive

Leh: In a significant move aimed at countering the increasing threat and incidents of incursion by China's People's Liberation Army, the Centre is contemplating replacing the ITBP by the Army, particularly in the Ladakh sector.
Maximum number of incidents of incursion have been reported here. The Army's role in handling the recent crisis at Chumar has been appreciated as it took a tough stand on the issue of not letting the PLA troops to intimidate its soldiers.
The Army had even successfully managed to set up an observation hut at a strategic location in the Chumar region. Government sources said it was the Army's prompt and immediate action that put a complete check on PLA's plans for any further advancement into the Indian territory.

The Army had even successfully managed to set up an observation hut at a strategic location in the Chumar region.

Thus, there is now a growing view in the government that the Army and not the ITBP should be made the "first line of defence'' along the India-China border.
The issue was discussed between National Security Advisor Ajit Doval and the officials of the Defence and Home Ministry.

~~~~~~~~~

This should have been done much earlier. However, better late than never.

 

[Bhadra]

Army may replace ITBP on Sino-India border

Army may replace ITBP on Sino-India border



In a significant move aimed at countering the increasing threat and incidents of incursion by China's People's Liberation Army, the government is contemplating replacing the ITBP with the Army, particularly in the Ladakh sector, where the maximum number of incidents of incursion have been reported over the last few months.

The Army's role in handling the recent crisis at Chumar has come in for appreciation as it took a tough stand on the issue, not letting the PLA troops initimidate its soldiers. The Army had even successfully managed to set up an observation hut at a strategic location in the Chumar region from where it could closely monitor all activities of the Chinese troops. Top government sources said it was the Army's prompt and immediate action that put a complete check on PLA's plans for any further advancement into Indian territory.

Thus, there is now a growing view among the highest quarters in the government that the Army and not the ITBP should be made the "first line of defence" along the Sino-India border. During the ongoing Chumar crisis also, several rounds of discussions were held between national security adviser Ajit Doval and top officials from the ministries of defence and home where the assessment was that the Army should replace the ITBP, particularly in the Ladakh region. The NSA had been personally monitoring the standoff between the Indian and the Chinese security forces in Chumar. The ITBP, the paramilitary force which is primarily responsible for guarding the Sino-India border, however, would remain deployed along other areas in Uttarakhand and Northeast. "Since the Chinese take advantage of the fact that there is no clear demarcation along the Line of Actual Control and enter Indian territory, there is a feeling that the Army's presence will act as a huge deterrent. This argument has been strengthened following the tactful handling of the situation in Chumar by the Army," a senior government functionary said.

Sources said while broadly there was consensus on increasing the Army's presence along the LAC and the border in Ladakh sector, there were certain logistical issues that had to be taken care of before a formal decision is taken. "The adequate availability of troops without adversely affecting the functioning of the security forces is one of the key issues that is being looked into. So the exercise may take some time," the official added.


Army may replace ITBP on Sino-India border | The Asian Age

 

[JBH22]

ITBP was originally envisaged as some crack troops, but with years plagued with bureaucracy from Ministry of Internal Affairs it became more or less policing unit.

Should have a homogenous border security force specialising in guerilla warfare.

 

[kseeker]

ITBP was originally envisaged as some crack troops, but with years plagued with bureaucracy from Ministry of Internal Affairs it became more or less policing unit.

Should have a homogenous border security force specialising in guerilla warfare.

I agree on this.


@Ray Sir,

Couple of questions...

I am unable to comprehend, why there are different units (BSF, ITBP, RR etc...) deployed when it comes to securing our borders?

Why can't we have a single Army under one chain of command which will guard our borders?

 

[Razor]

Couple of questions...

I am unable to comprehend, why there are different units (BSF, ITBP, RR etc...) deployed when it comes to securing our borders?

I asked the same question a long time back while chatting on SB with @Dovah
He told me it could possibly be for better management, though I am not fully convinced with that.

Why can't we have a single Army under one chain of command which will guard our borders?

I think the reason they don't use the Army for border patrol/guarding is because the Army is a component of the military and therefore I think it increases the gravity of the situation around the border. Just guessing.

 

[Bhadra]

Re: Army may replace ITBP on Sino-India border

From mere four battalions, this force has become a 55 battalions force and 13 more to be raised with one Lt Gen rank officer and eight Maj Gen rank officers warming their seats.

After all India has limited resorces.

If this force is ineffective, why not to disband them and give that manpower to the Army ?

Govt of india has strange ways of functioning.

 

[pmaitra]

Re: Army may replace ITBP on Sino-India border

From mere four battalions, this force has become a 55 battalions force and 13 more to be raised with one Lt Gen rank officer and eight Maj Gen rank officers warming their seats.

After all India has limited resorces.

If this force is ineffective, why not to disband them and give that manpower to the Army ?

Govt of india has strange ways of functioning.

The military is under the Ministry of Defence. ITBP is under the Ministry of Home Affairs. Therein lies the difference.

The difference is also between military and para-military.

 

[Bhadra]

Re: Army may replace ITBP on Sino-India border

The military is under the Ministry of Defence. ITBP is under the Ministry of Home Affairs. Therein lies the difference.

The difference is also between military and para-military.

ITBP is not Paramilitary. It is CPO Force. As per definition of goverment of India only Assam Rifes, SFF and Coast Gurds is Paramilitary.

In our context, management of a disputed border can not or rather should not be the responsibility of a Police force. They are neither equipped not organised nor led to deal with a force like PLA or even Chinese border guards. Their DIG sits in Leh and IG sits in Delhi and men are left on posts to fend for themselves.

 

[kseeker]

I think the reason they don't use the Army for border patrol/guarding is because the Army is a component of the military and therefore I think it increases the gravity of the situation around the border. Just guessing.

I do not remember exactly but in one of the books written by Maj G D Bakshi (retd) or Maj Mukul Deva (retd), I had read that, it's the past central govt.s which have created this mess to de-centralise the power of Army, they have this delusion that, army might go for a coup and take over civilian govt.

 

[Bhadra]

Couple of questions...

I am unable to comprehend, why there are different units (BSF, ITBP, RR etc...) deployed when it comes to securing our borders?

Why can't we have a single Army under one chain of command which will guard our borders?

It has a long history.... the history dating back to pre 1962 when entire Ladakh was under police forces under DIB and they lost almost entire Ladakh...


In recent times, The Subramaniam Committee on Security constituted in the aftermath of Kargil War had recommended that internal security, border management and dister management should be responsibility of the MHA (Police Forces)...

The MHA came up with and idea of bulding their empires and propogated ideas of "one border one force" thereby deputing forces as under :

IB with Pakistan - BSF
IB with Bangladesh _ BSF
IB with Nepal and Bhutan - SSB
Border with China _ ITBP

Border with Myanmar _ Assam Rifles (Under Army) but under being snatched away by BSF to further strethen their already bloated empire.


The MHA raised more than 250 battalions for this purpose (250 battalions means equivalant to or close to 30 Army Divisons)...

MHA added close to 150 IGs ( Maj Gen ) ranks to their kitty, thousand of DIG ranks and so much of budget - billions in rupees... purchase of equipment Arms and vehicles etc.

IAS added many secretary level ranks and scores of Joint Secretary ranks to their kitty in the name of disaster management, internal security and border management..

Disaster management was put under MHA... but never ever undertaken by it except showing a few NDRF personel on TV..

Nothing given to Army !! No increase or increment.

But when it comes to crisis it is always the Army which has to manage boder (LC) with Pakistan, Borders with China (LAC) and Myanmar. Army has to undertake counter insugency operations in spite of thousand strong Central police forces. The increase in strength of Central police forces is being employed as personal attandants of IAS, IPS and politicians. Recently it was revealed the Director CBI, MR Sinha had 20 attandents of IPBP at his home ! That is management of Tibet Border !! Ha..

Inspite of all this Chiddu wanted Army to be deployed for anti - Naxal operations.

It is natural for any one to ask - then why were these sores of battalions raised - just to pay them monthely salaries.?

This is the minimum question which every citizen of the country is enlitled to ask.

 

[kseeker]

It has a long history.... the history dating back to pre 1962 when entire Ladakh was under police forces under DIB and they lost almost entire Ladakh...


In recent times, The Subramaniam Committee on Security constituted in the aftermath of Kargil War had recommended that internal security, border management and dister management should be responsibility of the MHA (Police Forces)...

The MHA came up with and idea of bulding their empires and propogated ideas of "one border one force" thereby deputing forces as under :

IB with Pakistan - BSF
IB with Bangladesh _ BSF
IB with Nepal and Bhutan - SSB
Border with China _ ITBP

Border with Myanmar _ Assam Rifles (Under Army) but under being snatched away by BSF to further strethen their already bloated empire.


The MHA raised more than 250 battalions for this purpose (250 battalions means equivalant to or close to 30 Army Divisons)...

MHA added close to 150 IGs ( Maj Gen ) ranks to their kitty, thousand of DIG ranks and so much of budget - billions in rupees... purchase of equipment Arms and vehicles etc.

IAS added many secretary level ranks and scores of Joint Secretary ranks to their kitty in the name of disaster management, internal security and border management..

Disaster management was put under MHA... but never ever undertaken by it except showing a few NDRF personel on TV..

Nothing given to Army !! No increase or increment.

But when it comes to crisis it is always the Army which has to manage boder (LC) with Pakistan, Borders with China (LAC) and Myanmar. Army has to undertake counter insugency operations in spite of thousand strong Central police forces. The increase in strength of Central police forces is being employed as personal attandants of IAS, IPS and politicians. Recently it was revealed the Director CBI, MR Sinha had 20 attandents of IPBP at his home ! That is management of Tibet Border !! Ha..

Inspite of all this Chiddu wanted Army to be deployed for anti - Naxal operations.

It is natural for any one to ask - then why were these sores of battalions raised - just to pay them monthely salaries.?

This is the minimum question which every citizen of the country is enlitled to ask.

Thanks for the elucidations.

This is indeed a shocking news. The current govt. should disband BSF, ITBP and their likes and merge them into Army.

 

[Bhadra]

Thanks for the elucidations.

This is indeed a shocking news. The current govt. should disband BSF, ITBP and their likes and merge them into Army.

That is what was not intended by me.

The police forces in the country need prfessionisation.

They are not simply meant for law and order except for CRPF which is the largest force.

IPS officers largely are law and order or intelligence oriented. they are neither interested in Force Management nor border areas problems or Border Management. Whenever posted there they reamin in capital cities.

The Central Forces Like BSF, ITBP, Assam Rifles, CISF, SSB and ITBP are semi military ( Not paramilitary forces) and these forces must be kept out of the cluthes of the IPS. These forces must be converted into Paramilitary Forces.

What it means is that these forces must be militarised - that is to say must be brought for operational command of the Army. Should preferably be officered and trained by the Army. Should be fully able to provide defense of borders even under war. Should be fully integrated with the Army and Army's operational plans.

In our neighbourhood these type of border forces are fully under Army in Tibet, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Why not in India ?

Then only can the country have an active reserve of trained manpower specially against Chinese where The Chinese will bring in 30 divisions against India. Against one or two divisions of Indian Army.

That is only way to face China without significantly increasing strenth of the Army units and defense budget.

 

[Bhadra]

ITBP was originally envisaged as some crack troops, but with years plagued with bureaucracy from Ministry of Internal Affairs it became more or less policing unit.

Should have a homogenous border security force specialising in guerilla warfare.

It was a force of four battalions to begin with being raised as irregular guerrila force consissting of local lads.

Today it is a disorganised 55 battalion force -

All India composition force -- Madrasies deployed in High altitude areas.

It is 50 percent reservation Force - more of a vote bank than a forces.

Retirement age of a constable is 58 yeras .

there resrvation in promotion including amonst officers ranks - so all officers and middle ranks are SC / ST and OBC. All leftovers are constables from higher castes.

So you expect a 58 year old disgruntled constable to fight a young PLA Chinese in Chumar or DBO - high expectations.

The condition is just pathetic.

 

[pmaitra]

Re: Army may replace ITBP on Sino-India border

ITBP is not Paramilitary. It is CPO Force. As per definition of goverment of India only Assam Rifes, SFF and Coast Gurds is Paramilitary.

In our context, management of a disputed border can not or rather should not be the responsibility of a Police force. They are neither equipped not organised nor led to deal with a force like PLA or even Chinese border guards. Their DIG sits in Leh and IG sits in Delhi and men are left on posts to fend for themselves.

CRPF is paramilitary, and yes, that 'C' stands for Central, and that 'P' stands for Police. Even BSF is paramilitary. This means, they are trained to perform somewhat like the military, but have the trappings of a police force. That is why they are under the Ministry of Home Affairs.

 

[Razor]

Re: Army may replace ITBP on Sino-India border

CRPF is paramilitary, and yes, that 'C' stands for Central, and that 'P' stands for Police. Even BSF is paramilitary. This means, they are trained to perform somewhat like the military, but have the trappings of a police force. That is why they are under the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Though technically CRPF is a paramilitary force, the government of India has adopted a more narrow definition for Paramilitary forces of India and that includes only Assam Rifles and Special Frontier Force.

And CRPF is (grouped by GoI) under Central Armed Police Forces.

 

[pmaitra]

Re: Army may replace ITBP on Sino-India border

Though technically CRPF is a paramilitary force, the government of India has adopted a more narrow definition for Paramilitary forces of India and that includes only Assam Rifles and Special Frontier Force.

And CRPF is (grouped by GoI) under Central Armed Police Forces.

You are correct. Even news articles refer to CRPF as paramilitary. That was the widely accepted term during the anti-Maoist operations.

 

[Bhadra]

Para Miltary.....

It is something like Para medic...

One has to medic fist to be para-medic. Similarily, one has to be military like to be Para-military..

CRPF or other CPO were never ever called Paramilitary or recognised as such. It was a craze amongst police officers in these organisation to be called Para military if not outright military.

The Assam Rifles and Coast Guards are police focrces - meaning that they are constantly envolved in law and order but they are organised and equipped as semi military force and can be used as a military force independentlly or having integrated with Defence Forces.

That is not the case of CRPF and other border policing Forces - BSF BEING LARGEST OF THEM.

BSF can also boast of having an airwing and water wing of their own - but due to their command and control, equipment, organisation and training they can not be employed on military tasks. When one says military task it has different conotation and meaning. Simply having a gun in hand and wearing khaki uniform is not good enough. One has to be trained for it, equipped for it and be able to inter - operate.

India simply does not have enough resources to bring these forces at par with Army. And why should that be done if Defense of India is simply not their mandate.

For example CRPF can be equipped with heavy machine guns to kill our own citizens even if they be Naxals. They can use disproprtinate force for their tasks.

However, India's securty challanges and the dynamics of internal security specially in view of the capacities and capabilities of our neighbours and foreign powers to wage proxy wars inside Indian territories does demand that these forces be equipped suitably.

However, what is more desirable is that these forces be brought under national security grid and preferably be militarised.

There may be an argument that militarisation of larger portion of society may not be desirable but miltarisation of adequate numbers to meet military challange is absolutely essentail or we will not be able to meet military challanges.

On the other hand Policisation which is akin to "criminalisation" of a large portion of society is more harmful than militarisation. An armed police forces invariably gets criminalised all over the world - and that is undeniable.

 

[Bhadra]

I do not remember exactly but in one of the books written by Maj G D Bakshi (retd) or Maj Mukul Deva (retd), I had read that, it's the past central govt.s which have created this mess to de-centralise the power of Army, they have this delusion that, army might go for a coup and take over civilian govt.

Raising a large CPO Forces to prevent coup might have been in the minds of the misguided Politicians of yore (like Nehru and Menon) but not after 64 years of independence.

There is something more to it than can meet the eye and that is Fedral structure of our polity with Unitary features.

State goverment should not and need not maintain large Armed Police Forces with sophisticated weapons and armament. It should be done by the Central Government only and state govermnets requirement be met by the Central goverment. This is economical and politican requirement.

What will happen if state goverments have large and well equipped police forces under them and these clash with each other over border/boundary dispute such as Belgaum or Nagaland / Assam border. What if the State Police Forces such as in Manipur of J&K become part of insugency and hand over their armoury to the insurgents ?? (many instances of that can be quoted)?


At Macro level, we are talking about management for application of Force or Voilance by the state as a sovereign right. There are gradations of that. First the dunda of police station, then is the tommy guns of state police forces and then the SLR / INSAS of Central police forces and ultimately the guns of the Army. These are the levels of unleashing voilance by the sovereign. It should be kept at that.

However, when we talk of border management it is not the same but a different ball game all together. There, one is required to confront a sophistcated and armed to teeth Jehadi, well eqipped PLA soldier or sophistcated Naga insurgent. There is nothing known as policing there. Those are areas of smal level battle management rather than policing by firing of SLR by an old policeman.

Supressing a coup by Army by Police Forces can be contemplated in Pakistan or Bangladesh not in India. Even in those countries it has been otherway round - that is supressing revolt of the Armed Police Forces such as BDR ( and in india PAC) by the Army.

If Army can indulge in Coups nothing stops a well equipped and organised Police Forces indulging into same !!

 

[pmaitra]

Para Miltary.....

It is something like Para medic...

One has to medic fist to be para-medic. Similarily, one has to be military like to be Para-military..

CRPF or other CPO were never ever called Paramilitary or recognised as such. It was a craze amongst police officers in these organisation to be called Para military if not outright military.

The Assam Rifles and Coast Guards are police focrces - meaning that they are constantly envolved in law and order but they are organised and equipped as semi military force and can be used as a military force independentlly or having integrated with Defence Forces.

That is not the case of CRPF and other border policing Forces - BSF BEING LARGEST OF THEM.

BSF can also boast of having an airwing and water wing of their own - but due to their command and control, equipment, organisation and training they can not be employed on military tasks. When one says military task it has different conotation and meaning. Simply having a gun in hand and wearing khaki uniform is not good enough. One has to be trained for it, equipped for it and be able to inter - operate.

India simply does not have enough resources to bring these forces at par with Army. And why should that be done if Defense of India is simply not their mandate.

For example CRPF can be equipped with heavy machine guns to kill our own citizens even if they be Naxals. They can use disproprtinate force for their tasks.

However, India's securty challanges and the dynamics of internal security specially in view of the capacities and capabilities of our neighbours and foreign powers to wage proxy wars inside Indian territories does demand that these forces be equipped suitably.

However, what is more desirable is that these forces be brought under national security grid and preferably be militarised.

There may be an argument that militarisation of larger portion of society may not be desirable but miltarisation of adequate numbers to meet military challange is absolutely essentail or we will not be able to meet military challanges.

On the other hand Policisation which is akin to "criminalisation" of a large portion of society is more harmful than militarisation. An armed police forces invariably gets criminalised all over the world - and that is undeniable.

Here you go, @Bhadra-ji:

para-

a prefix appearing in loanwords from Greek, most often attached to verbs and verbal derivatives, with the meanings "at or to one side of, beside, side by side" ( parabola; paragraph; parallel; paralysis), "beyond, past, by" ( paradox; paragogue); by extension from these senses, this prefix came to designate objects or activities auxiliary to or derivative of that denoted by the base word ( parody; paronomasia), and hence abnormal or defective ( paranoia), a sense now common in modern scientific coinages ( parageusia; paralexia). As an English prefix, para- 1, may have any of these senses; it is also productive in the naming of occupational roles considered ancillary or subsidiary to roles requiring more training, or of a higher status, on such models as paramedical, and paraprofessional: paralegal; paralibrarian; parapolice.

Example: The BSF was involved in COIN in J&K. So, it was acting as an auxiliary to the IA. So, BSF is para-mlitary, whether GoI defines it such, or not. Ditto with CRPF.

 

[Razor]

Para Miltary.....

It is something like Para medic...

One has to medic fist to be para-medic. Similarily, one has to be military like to be Para-military..

No. English is a bit weird.

In the case of paramedic, the suffix 'para' takes the meaning 'beyond'. So beyond medic. Similar to paranormal: beyond normal.

In the case of paramilitary, the suffix 'para' takes the meaning "on the side of", "in addition to", "similar to" as in the term "parallel". So paramilitary is a force similar and in addition to the the military. In most nations paramilitary forces are not controlled by the MoD but by the Ministry of Interior.