CDS news, updates, discussions and reports

[captscooby81]

The first task that CDS Gen Bipin Rawat has set for himself is to create a tri-services Air Defence Command to be handled by the IAF, perhaps to be headquartered at Allahabad. Except for Air Defence Units in Strike Corps, all air defence elements likely to be consolidated.

The next step could probably be set up a peninsular command combining the Eastern and Western Naval Command with the Navy exclusively handling its functioning. The ANC is also likely to be permanently transferred to The Indian Navy.

The biggest change is however expected to be on the Northern Front. A China Command extending from Karakoram Pass to Lipulekh probably headquartered at Lucknow, and combining elements of Army’s northern and Eastern Commands and IAF’s Eastern and Western Commands is contemplated

 

[Bhadra]

So the CDS starts with right earnest - Integration of Air Defense Command ......
Second straight away task must be - integration of Medical Services and bringing DGAFMS and DGADC under CDS for better coordination and budgeting. Integration of logistics will also be very necessary particularly to cater for Cold start operational requirements.

Another easy area of integration would be to put Works and BRO under CDS so that priorities are well assigned and executed in areas of border infrastructure development .

 

[Defcon 1]

The first task that CDS Gen Bipin Rawat has set for himself is to create a tri-services Air Defence Command to be handled by the IAF, perhaps to be headquartered at Allahabad. Except for Air Defence Units in Strike Corps, all air defence elements likely to be consolidated.

The next step could probably be set up a peninsular command combining the Eastern and Western Naval Command with the Navy exclusively handling its functioning. The ANC is also likely to be permanently transferred to The Indian Navy.

The biggest change is however expected to be on the Northern Front. A China Command extending from Karakoram Pass to Lipulekh probably headquartered at Lucknow, and combining elements of Army’s northern and Eastern Commands and IAF’s Eastern and Western Commands is contemplated

Air defence commands makes sense because it just combines the existing air defence assets of the three services, thereby improving defence and increasing efficiency. The rest that you have mentioned, China command, peninsular command, etc, will not be true theater commands, requiring all the pieces of equipment including its own tankers, AWACS, etc. IAF is opposed to it because such a theater command will require much greater amount of resources, at a time when IAF is facing one of the worst equipment crunches in its history. I don't think we are going to have such theater commands before 2030.

 

[Bhadra]

Air defence commands makes sense because it just combines the existing air defence assets of the three services, thereby improving defence and increasing efficiency. The rest that you have mentioned, China command, peninsular command, etc, will not be true theater commands, requiring all the pieces of equipment including its own tankers, AWACS, etc. IAF is opposed to it because such a theater command will require much greater amount of resources, at a time when IAF is facing one of the worst equipment crunches in its history. I don't think we are going to have such theater commands before 2030.

IAF will have to fall in line and air is integral to and part of land and seas. However, the IAF thrusts on exclusive ait battles or winning battles in air only as prime factor for winning all wars - air, land and seas would serious need a rethink particularly in terms of resources crunch. If one gives to to that concept, that inter alia means losing all wars if air wars are lost. No one could allow such a situation to emerge.

Air Defense of Naval operations under IAF may also face hurdles as the IN Navy keeps extending their range , reach and areas of interest. Point Air Defences on land may be under air force including those of strike or Pivot Corps but point air defense of Ships is the exclusive domain of ships.

So Air Defense of areas within missile and aircraft reach may very much be integrated but a lot of other AD resources still would remain exclusive to service elements.

 

[ezsasa]

IAF will have to fall in line and air is integral to and part of land and seas. However, the IAF thrusts on exclusive ait battles or winning battles in air only as prime factor for winning all wars - air, land and seas would serious need a rethink particularly in terms of resources crunch. If one gives to to that concept, that inter alia means losing all wars if air wars are lost. No one could allow such a situation to emerge.

Air Defense of Naval operations under IAF may also face hurdles as the IN Navy keeps extending their range , reach and areas of interest. Point Air Defences on land may be under air force including those of strike or Pivot Corps but point air defense of Ships is the exclusive domain of ships.

So Air Defense of areas within missile and aircraft reach may very much be integrated but a lot of other AD resources still would remain exclusive to service elements.

i don't think anyone is expecting barak 8 SAM on ships to be under IAF command, but rather PDV, AAD, S-400 , ASAT along with assets they already have for guarding their airfields.

For example : QRSAM attached to an IBG will not be under IAF.

 

[Bhadra]

i don't think anyone is expecting barak 8 SAM on ships to be under IAF command, but rather PDV, AAD, S-400 , ASAT along with assets they already have for guarding their airfields.

For example : QRSAM attached to an IBG will not be under IAF.

That is what I meant. I do not expect AD Command to protect IN Ships on the cost of Somalia.

 

[Defcon 1]

If one gives to to that concept, that inter alia means losing all wars if air wars are lost.

Isn't this more or less a given today, excluding guerrilla warfare of course? Gulf war one was such a good example of this. Once the USAF had done pounding Iraq, ground operations were mere formality.

 

[Bhadra]

Isn't this more or less a given today, excluding guerrilla warfare of course? Gulf war one was such a good example of this. Once the USAF had done pounding Iraq, ground operations were mere formality.

Firstly, Indian Forces are not going to undertake any Iraq like operations?
Secondly, it is absolutely false that in spite of such massive air operations, ground operations were such a cake walk.
Thirdly, in Indian context, ground operations is almost a daily affair as Indian Army guards more than 3000 km borders against hostile neighbours and in a hostile environment. That can never be done by any Air Force.
Fourthly, the air threats and air opposition in our context against Pakistan or China is nowhere like USA Vs Iraq. IAF can never achieve that superiority. Nor does IAF need that superiority against Maldives or Sri Lanka.

Fourthly, even if IAF archives complete destruction of Pak air power, ground operations can never be a cake walk and would still need active airsupport.

In our context, air power alone can never ever be counted as a sole battle / war winning factor. It will always be counted as an important factor. Our 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999 operations are a testimony to that.

 

[Bhadra]

Explained: What are role, powers of CDS?
With General Bipin Rawat taking over as India’s first Chief of Defence Staff, a look at the structure of the Defence Ministry, and the relationship the CDS will have with the ministry and the armed forces.
https://indianexpress.com/article/e...-roles-powers-chief-of-defence-staff-6195264/

 

[Bhadra]

With General Bipin Rawat taking over as the first Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) on New Year’s Day, a new structure is being created in the Defence Ministry. What will be the nature of the relationship between the new four-star general and the ministry?

It is said that the CDS is a ‘dual-hatted role’. What does that mean?

The dual-hatted role refers to the two hats the CDS wears: one of the permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee which has the three service chiefs as members, and the other of the head of the newly created Department of Military Affairs (DMA) in the ministry. The former is a military role while the latter is a role in the government; it is as the head of DMA that his major responsibilities within the ministry will be discharged.

 

[Bhadra]

How many other departments does the Defence Ministry have, and who so far was looking after what will now be the charter of DMA?

The ministry already had four departments: Department of Defence; Department of Defence Production; Department of Defence Research and Development; and Department of Ex-servicemen Welfare. Each of them is headed by a Secretary, with the Department of Defence being the nerve centre of the ministry, looking after all issues pertaining to the armed forces, defence policy and procurement.

The charter of duties of the DMA was so far looked after by the Department of Defence, which is headed by the Defence Secretary who is also the secretary in-charge of the Defence Ministry. Work exclusively pertaining to military matters will fall within the purview of the DMA while the Department of Defence will deal with larger issues pertaining to defence of the country. To give an illustrative example, this means that while tri-service military training institutions will fall under the DMA, organisations like IDSA and NDC whose remit is broader than military matters will fall under the Department of Defence.

 

[Bhadra]

Are the armed forces — the Army, the Navy and the Air Force — not departments of the ministry?

No, the service headquarters, and thereby the armed forces, are attached offices in the ministry. They used to come under the Department of Defence so far, but will now fall under the ambit of DMA, and will have an appropriate mix of civilian and military officers at every level.

Attached offices are generally responsible for providing executive direction required in implementation of policies laid down by the department to which they are attached, in this case now the DMA. They also serve as a repository of technical information and advise the department on technical aspects of questions they deal with. In essence, they are executive agencies carrying our directions of the Defence Ministry whose task is to draft them, obtain approval from the government and communicate them for implementation to the defence services.

 

[Bhadra]

But won’t the CDS command the three service chiefs, and be the single-point military adviser to the government?

No, neither. He will act as the Principal Military Adviser to the Defence Minister only on tri-services matters. In fact, the three service chiefs will continue to advise the Defence Minister, as done so far, on matters exclusively concerning their respective services. The government has also made it explicitly clear that the CDS will not exercise any military command, including over the three service chiefs. But the service chiefs will be members of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, which will be headed by the CDS. And the DMA, headed by the CDS, will also have the armed forces under its ambit — if promotions, postings and disciplinary matters of three services fall under the DMA, it will give the CDS extensive influence over the three service chiefs.

 

[Bhadra]

Have the service chiefs lost any of their major powers or tasks to the CDS?

Not really. None of the powers of the service chiefs, including of advising the government, has been curtailed and transferred to the CDS. The only thing is the role of Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, which used to be headed by the senior-most chief by rotation. That has been shelved with the CDS being the permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, where he will be supported by the Headquarters Integrated Defence Staff.

However, the CDS has been given a time-bound task, to be done within three years, to bring about jointness in operations, logistics, transport, training, support services, communications, and repairs and maintenance of the three services, which will eventually lead to shedding of responsibilities by the service headquarters. As the head of the DMA, the CDS has to also facilitate restructuring of military commands for optimal utilisation of resources by bringing about jointness in operations, including through establishment of joint/ theatre commands. This is again a far-reaching move, which will potentially impinge on the remit of the service chiefs.

 

[Bhadra]

The CDS has the status of a Cabinet Secretary, but functionally will head a department headed by a Secretary. Also, he will be under a ministry where the Defence Secretary is in charge of the ministry. Isn’t this a bit complicated?

Yes, it is. But that is the nature of government functioning and his dual-hatted role will decide the different kind of powers, access and relationships that will be forged by the CDS. Norms of functioning and political guidance, more than hard-coded bureaucratic rules, will determine the functional efficiency and effectiveness of the CDS and it will be upon General Rawat to establish this as the first incumbent of the new office.

 

[Bhadra]

Finally, will the CDS be responsible for the defence of the country?

No, as per the gazette notification issued by the government on December 30, the Department of Defence — headed by the Defence Secretary — will be responsible for the “defence of India and every part thereof, including defence policy and preparation for defence and all such acts as may be conducive in times of war to its prosecution and after its termination to effective demobilisation”.

 

[Popeye]

The first task that CDS Gen Bipin Rawat has set for himself is to create a tri-services Air Defence Command to be handled by the IAF, perhaps to be headquartered at Allahabad. Except for Air Defence Units in Strike Corps, all air defence elements likely to be consolidated.

The next step could probably be set up a peninsular command combining the Eastern and Western Naval Command with the Navy exclusively handling its functioning. The ANC is also likely to be permanently transferred to The Indian Navy.

The biggest change is however expected to be on the Northern Front. A China Command extending from Karakoram Pass to Lipulekh probably headquartered at Lucknow, and combining elements of Army’s northern and Eastern Commands and IAF’s Eastern and Western Commands is contemplated

Good Good Army Eastern Command should be shifted. Kolkata pathetic place.

 

[Bhadra]

Good Good Army Eastern Command should be shifted. Kolkata pathetic place.

Oh yah, Jyoti Basu's son wanted to open a seven star hotel in Fort William. Momota would also be very happy to give fort William to her friend or cousin.

Are you advocating that ????????????

 

[Popeye]

Oh yah, Jyoti Basu's son wanted to open a seven star hotel in Fort William. Momota would also be very happy to give fort William to her friend or cousin.

Are you advocating that ????????????

No No I'm not saying that.
You know well previously(before 1963) Eastern Command was located in Lucknow.
PM MODI doing good thing.
Kolkata isn't strategically ideal place.
Overall Lucknow is nearer to chickens neck.

 

[Bhadra]

No No I'm not saying that.
You know well previously(before 1963) Eastern Command was located in Lucknow.
PM MODI doing good thing.
Kolkata isn't strategically ideal place.
Overall Lucknow is nearer to chickens neck.

But then 1962 took place and Nehru shown his place by Chou Enlie.
Calcutta is very very sensitive strategic location. It used to be and still is a gateway to East, a hub of Economy, Industry, Communication and Politics. Located at the base of four countries - Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and China. British ear locations were designed for territorial control of India rather than to protect Indian borders.

Eastern Command deals with Five foregn countries and Seven Indian States. If one counts its territorial jurisdiction then it is eleven Indian states. Say half of India.

What is required is splitting Eastern Command into Tow Army Commands rather than such irrational ideas as shifting Eastern Command out of calcutta. That is what land shark politicians and bureaucrats would dream of.