Govt must act now! Much more needs to be done to keep Pakistan and China in check

A pre-dawn ambush by Pakistan-backed terrorists killed 19 Indian soldiers at an Army camp in Kashmir’s Uri in September last year. The worst terror attack in several years sparked nation-wide outrage and raised the pitch for a quick retaliation. There was a strong view in India’s security and political establishments that the Army must strike back. 

In strategic meetings over the next few days, a hit-back plan was discussed. But some disturbing facts were laid bare, sources say. The Army had the capacity to retaliate. But in case of full-scale retaliation by the enemy, did we have the firepower to fight even a short, intense war? The answer was — no.

Low on ammo

As per the Army’s operational doctrine, it is required to maintain firepower for 40 “days of intense war”. After the Kargil conflict in 1999,  new “minimum acceptable risk level”’ standards were set to be prepared to fight a 20-day, intense war. But an internal review the Army did and shared with the government post-Uri revealed that the ammunition holdings would not last beyond 10 days. The ammunition for tanks and artillery for sustaining superior firepower was in the most critical state, sources say. All this also crippled training and made troops vulnerable.

The assessment said that the Army needed to immediately procure ammunition and spare parts for weapons and military systems worth Rs 40,000 crore to be ready even for a 20-day war. The CAG has also pointed out in its recent report on the Army and the state-run Ordnance Factories that 40 per cent of the ammunition will not last beyond 10 days and only 20 per cent can meet the authorised standards of 40 days.

Wake-up call

Within 10 days of the Uri attack, the Army struck back, carrying out “surgical strikes” across the LoC, destroying terror camps backed by Pakistan’s Army. The possibility of retaliation could not be ruled out. “The message was clear. It’s not boot power but firepower that wins wars,” says an Army source.

Finally, the political leadership took prompt decisions to fill the critical gaps. In October, the Vice-Chiefs of all three services — Army, Navy and Air Force — were given a three-month, temporary power for emergency procurements. Last month, this was further extended by another three months amid a prolonged military standoff with China on the Sikkim border and Indian troops combating regular shelling and border raids from Pakistan. In the last six months, procurements worth Rs 11,000 crore have been made by the Army. This included 19 contracts, of which 11 were for ammunition whose supplies started this month.

Sources say there is still a long road ahead to meet the standard requirement that will cost around Rs 40,000 crore. “This could go up,” said an Army source. Defence Minister Arun Jaitely said on July 28 that the Indian armed forces are fully equipped to face any contingency, asserting that any shortage in terms of arms and ammunition would be expeditiously made up. “If any action has to be taken, it will be taken,” he said in the Lok Sabha.

Repeated shortfalls

This is not the first time the Army has raised a red flag. In 2012, then Army Chief General VK Singh, who is now the Minister of State for External Affairs, had written to then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for steps to enhance the Army’s preparedness and capacity. He called the situation “alarming”, stating that bureaucratic delays in procurements led to a shortage of ammunition, lack of weaponry and obsolete air defence systems.

The Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) remains the main source of ammunition for the Army and is expected to meet over 90 per cent of demands, but it has regularly fallen short of targets. The shortfalls have ranged between 64 per cent and 95 per cent since 2013. Between 2009 and 2014, the Army placed ammunition orders worth Rs 25,000 crore, but there was a delivery shortfall of Rs 6,000 crore. In the next phase, between 2014 and 2019, the Army’s requirement was nearly double, but it had to be restricted due to the incapacity of the OFB in manufacturing high amounts of ammunition, sources say.

In a scathing indictment, the CAG has observed in its report that despite continued slips in ammunition supplies, no mechanism has been introduced to fix the responsibility. With 41 OFB units, eight Defence Public Sector Units and nearly 50 labs for research and development, including those of the Defence and Research Development Organisation, there is enough infrastructure to cater to the need, but sources say only 30 per cent of it has been achieved.

The way forward

The poor track record has prompted the government to look for options in the private sector. To make up for the deficits and reduce import dependence, a proposal was made in March for the manufacture of eight types of critical ammunition by the Indian industry. Sources say 25 companies have showed willingness to manufacture ammunition. 

Lt Gen (retired) Ravi Thodge, who was the Army’s Master General Ordnance till June last year,  says there has been an improvement after the government’s ‘Make in India’ plan for ammunition was put in place, but certain timelines have again been missed. “The situation is not alarming, but it’s not happy either. Soldiers on the ground should have the confidence that they will never be short of ammunition,” says Thodge.

Thodge adds that getting the private sector involved is the only option to be self-reliant. 

“With OFB, there is no accountability. We never tried to evolve the ability to manufacture ammunition. There should be no compromise on quality. But we are nowhere near it,” he says. Lt Gen (retired) SL Narasimhan echoes a similar view. “OFB has the capability but lack of accountability has led to most of the problems,” he says.  

Navy, Air Force have problems of their own

The Air Force and the Navy, though better off than the Army in terms of modernisation and equipment, have their own problems. The Air Force is short on fighter jets. Officially sanctioned to have 42 squadrons, it has only 33. This could be down to 19 by 2027, as revealed in a Parliamentary panel report last month. This means the number of warplanes has come down from 650 to 380. 

While India has signed a deal for 36 Rafale jets from France, the original plan was to acquire 136.   

In a recent letter to his officers, IAF Chief BS Dhanoa talked about the need for the force to remain ready for operations with its “present holdings”, a reference to the force’s reduced strength.

He also talked about the need for the Air Force to remain aware of new technological advancements in war-fighting and gauge the strength of India’s adversaries.

Meanwhile, the Navy’s ambitious programme approved in 1999 to build six Scorpene-class submarines is going slow. India has 13 submarines but 11 have been around for 25 years completing their service life. With China enhancing its naval capabilities in the Indian Ocean Region, building ports in Djibouti, Sri Lanka and Pakistan, there is a reason for worry, experts believe.

In its recent report, the CAG slammed the Directorate of Naval Design for the delay in Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) since the design of the corvettes was amended 24 times.

“Against the 18 weapons and sensors to be installed on ASW Corvettes, audit observed that the two ASW Corvettes delivered were not fitted with X weapon and sensor systems. Thus, ASW Corvettes could not perform to its full potential as envisaged,” it said. 

The MoD sanctioned Rs 331.27 crore for the augmentation of infrastructure facilities for construction of ASW Corvettes since as per the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) note of March 2003, it was felt that the existing infrastructure was considered to be grossly inadequate. The modernisation was completed in 2013-14 as against the scheduled completion of July 2009 and thus the work of modernisation of shipyard as well as construction of corvettes were undertaken simultaneously, the CAG report stated.

The CAG also highlighted the lack of safety in the Navy’s ships and submarines that were involved in 38 accidents between 2007-08 and 2015-16, adversely affecting the operational preparedness of the force.
The audit report on the Navy and Coast Guard said that the Navy had no institutionalised framework to deal with safety since its inception.

Though a dedicated organisation for dealing with safety issues was set up by the Indian Navy in 2014, it still awaited government sanction.

The loss of a ship and submarine adversely affects the operational preparedness of the Navy as acquisition of new ships and submarines takes more than eight to 10 years.

“It is, therefore, imperative that Navy maintains its assets free from accidents during peacetime evolutions,” the CAG said.

What hampers the Army’s fighting capability

Fuse deficiency

With 83 per cent deficiency in fuses, the artillery firepower is compromised. A fuse is fitted to the shell before firing to trigger explosion. Without a fuse, the ammunition cannot be used. As the shift was made from mechanical to electronic fuse without identifying alternate manufacturers, it has led to acute shortage. In the next year, the Army expects to get around 7.5 lakh fuses, sources say. The two Defence Public Sector Units have failed to supply the orders for the last 4-5 years, sources say. 

Poor maintenance 

On May 31, 2016, fire in an ammunition depot in Maharashtra’s Pulgaon killed 19 people and two officers, but till date nobody has been held accountable. Tonnes of rejected ammunition are dumped at depots risking human life. It was the delay in disposal of this unserviceable ammunition that led to the fire. Inadequate fire-control systems have made people working there vulnerable.  

Quest for a modern assault rifle

It’s been a while that the Army has been looking for a standard modern assault rifle that can replace INSAS (Indian Small Arms Systems). The review of an indigenously-designed assault rifle done by the Army has found the weapon “unsatisfactory” and “unreliable”. The weapon being developed by OFB was expected to meet the Army’s requirement of nearly 2 lakh assault rifles. Surveillance equipment, night fighting and gaps in weaponry have also been ailing the Army.  

OFB to focus on ‘core’ military items

OFB has also been manufacturing “non-core” items that don’t require military expertise. According to an order dated April 27, 2017, the Army can procure these items from other indigenous sources. OFB can participate in the Request for Proposal (RFP) and get orders on competitive basis. Sources say the decision was taken so that OFB can concentrate on core areas like ammunition, weapons and enhancing military capabilities. OFB is now free to wind up all the factories producing non-core items and put them to alternate use.