TURF WAR FOR COMMAND OF BORDER SECURITY FORCE

 

Union territory of Jammu & Kashmir is battling Pakistan sponsored   terrorism sustained through infiltration from across the line of control and international border since late eighties. Infiltration and encounters are continuing unabated despite International border guarded by BSF and Line of control by Army. Inability to stop infiltration is the reason for sustenance of militancy in J&K. On 19 November 2020, four suspected Jaish-e-Mohammad militants  killed in an encounter in Nagrota. The killing followed subsequent detection of tunnel allegedly   used by militants to cross over to India from Pakistan.  After every such incident, a patterned debate starts on social media spearheaded by  military  veterans  to call for new command dynamics in Border Security Force.

 After tunnel detection, some of the veterans highlighted alleged deficiencies in BSFs Naka system without giving specifics through generalised comments. Similarly, one of the senior veterans called into question the one border one-force concept and need for placing border-guarding forces under Army operational control on the pattern of Pakistan, China and Bangladesh.

Over ground, infiltration on Jammu border has almost dried up due to impregnable security grid developed by BSF for round the clock vigil through manpower intensive security set up supported by surveillance equipment and night vision devices. US Mexico border has been famous for tunnels for smuggling and illegal immigration.  USA found it   difficult to detect tunnels despite possessing technology for the purpose. BSF kept the explosively dangerous border of Jammu infiltration free need appreciation. From 2012 to 2020, BSF detected around ten tunnels   through continuous and sustained human vigil without any technical support.  BSF deserve appreciation for effort and not brickbats.   None of the tunnel detection systems tried on Jammu border were suitable as failed to yield desired results.  

 Instead of finger pointing, need is to study,do honest and real analysis of recent incidents ,shortcomings, capability deficiencies, inherent organisational weaknesses and  carry out course correction to prevent repetition of  incidents which affect  national security. Need is to fix accountability for continuous infiltration through line of control (LOC) and international border (IB). Line of control terrain is hazardous, hostile, difficult and prone to infiltration through numerous routes but certainly, it can be contained.

 What are the reasons for cropping up of tunnels at irregular intervals on international border of Jammu? The role of intelligence agencies and their failure to provide intelligence on such possibilities also need to be analysed. Pakistan is selectively resorting to tunnelling since over ground infiltration is   difficult due to effective surveillance and security grid of BSF. All along the international border, there is thick foliage on Pakistan side, which enables militants to hide, resort to tunnelling undetected. Agricultural activity on Pakistan side up to zero line enables any one to approach IB for the purpose of mischief under active patronage of rangers. The present tunnel dug in the Samba sector was at a depth of about twenty fit and earlier tunnels detected were at depth of ten to twenty fit. It is humanely impossible to detect any activity at that depth even standing on top of it.

 Militants infiltrated using tunnel and if intelligence   was available, as it seems, why it not shared with BSF need probing. Any laxity, which led to construction of tunnel need probing, accountability established and fixed. The failure of second tier of security manned by Army to catch militants also need to be looked. The failure of intelligence agencies also need analysis. There is continuous infiltration through line of control despite heavy army deployment supported by technical surveillance and fencing also called anti Infiltration obstacle system (AIOS). Infiltration from line of control has sustained militancy in J&K.  

One border one force concept was a well thought out policy implemented by National Democratic Alliance Government after detailed deliberations. BSF ensured full proof security of national borders under its command in difficult hostile and pathetic conditions. Finger pointing and criticism by veterans smack of ignorance and bias. Need   to strengthen BSF by providing it modern weapons and technology to stop over ground and underground infiltration.  Need is to clear pending reserve battalion proposal. Veterans need to strengthen border security by impressing government to strengthen Border Security Force and not harp on single point agenda of command change. Where is the guarantee that after command change there will be no infiltration and militancy? Will veterans guarantee that?

 

R c Sharma

Commandant (Retd)

BSF