ITBP AS LEAD AGENCY ON LAC
As per media reports, government of India is working on a proposal to make Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), lead agency along Line of Actual Control(LAC). The purpose seems to avoid future conflicts between Indian Army and Peoples Liberation Army(PLA) to avoid repeat of 2020. Implications of move need analysis and are as follows:-
- ITBP will be the first line of defence all along the Line of Actual control and Army will be in second tier to avoid conflict between Indian Army and Peoples Liberation Army (PLA).
- It will be single point of contact with Chinese border defence regiment through well established communication system to avoid future conflicts.
- The protocol in all likelihood for ITBP functioning and operation will be as followed on International border.
- It also means that ITBP will be operating independent of Army and Army's continuous professional advise for placing ITBP under operational control of Army for better operational synergy and optimum effective utilisation of ITBP has not been accepted..
- Government need to sanction additional battalions, border outposts and infrastructure for ITBP to operate on Line of Actual control in addition to the existing ones.
- Long term aim of placing ITBP along LAC in first tier seems to convert LAC into international border which means government accepted the present ground positions on LAC.
General VP Malik, Former Vice Chief of Army Staff(COAS) reacted to the idea in a tweet on 16 August 22, It is " An illogical ,dumb idea. When adversary looks to surprise us on LAC.we want to place Army behind ITBP in second tier. First tier controlled by MHA and second by MOD! Have we forgotten how two years ago PLA was diverted from exercise deployment to intrude across LAC?".
Hard fact is that China is belligerent and hostile towards India. The situation along LAC is volatile not normal. China through its hostile actions is continuously disturbing peace and tranquility all along LAC.It has already rendered 1993 and 1996 agreements inoperable. Rather to further cock a snoop has implemented New law on land borders which came into effect from 01 Jan 2022 at a time when border stand off in Eastern Ladakh is unresolved despite many rounds of talks. As per new protocol it has also renamed several places in Arunachal Pradesh as part of its claim over Indian state. New Land border law calls for establishment of boundary markets and new villages on its borders to clearly mark the borders. US department of Defence report " Military and Security Developments Involving the Peoples Republic of China" submitted to US congress in a special topic "PRC-INDIA BORDER STANDOFF" says " PRC has continued taking incremental and tactical actions to press its claims at LAC. Some times in 2020,the PRC a large built 100 home civilian village inside disputed territory between PRCs TAR and India's Arunachal Pradesh" Another report cites "628 Xiaokang villages on border along 3488 KM LAC stretching from Eastern Ladakh to Arunachal Pradesh".
The long term aim of establishment of markets /villages is to give legal cover and formalise its transgression on Indian territory. It has laid claims to Indian territory in Northern, Central sector and Eastern sector to the extent that claims whole of Arunachal Pradesh and calls it South Tibet. Only way to defeat and take on China is through strong economy and strong Armed Forces and national resolve.
The article by Lt Gen KJ Singh titled "Need Theatrisation,not lead agency on China border" is very apt and timely. It brings out the need to strengthen armed forces all along LAC to deter Chines from any deceptive surprise action on LAC.
Despite military presence on own side ,large scale diversion of PLA troops from exercises could not be detected resulting in Chinese intrusions and Galwan valley clash where in India lost 20 brave hearts protecting motherland valiantly,Will it be possible for ITBP to avert such deceptive action along LAC even in dormant disputed sectors and will Army be able to react in time to avert such action from second tier. This need large debate and discussion before proposal is implemented.
Follwing is suggested in this regard to strengthen national defence and National Security:-
- Border Management be restricted to international borders with Ministry of Home Affairs as Lead Agency
- No tinkering be done in status quo as far as De-Facto borders are concerned. Line of control and Line of Actual control be left to Ministry of defence and Armed Forces.
- Like BSF being under operational control of Army on Line of Control ,ITBP be placed under operational control of Army all along Line of Actual Control in the national interest for national security instead of compartmentalising security in different domains undermining national interest.
-War time training of CAPFs is a non priority domain,Military need to impress upon government for war time training of CAPFs under different formations to which CAPF units are assigned for the purpose.
I have certain reservations on issues raised in the article concerning g CAPFs. To me it seems that CAPFs are labelled hesitant which is unjust to them.
- Do not agree with contention that CAPFs lack proactivity. It is their proactive professional approach that they have successfully ensured safety and security of Indian borders and also internal security despite enormous constraints under which they operate which are not faced by Armed Forces. The stellar role of BSF in 1971 liberation war, strong defence of Line of control in Kargil conflict that Pakistanis were not able to intrude from areas occupied by BSF since BSF anticipated and never vacated any of positions. This has been elaborated in an article titled " Kargil War: Unrecognized contribution of BSF" dated 26 July 2020 by Sh S K Sood Addl DG(Retd)
-CAPFs did not even have basic intelligence structures may be true at the time of raising but is not true at present . CAPFs do have their intelligence organisational structure. Certainly their is always room for improvement and polishing professionalism in all domains including intelligence.As per Sh SK Sood Addl DG BSF (Retd) in his piece titled " Kargil War: Unrecognised contribution of BSF" says " The role of BSF in the Kargil war effort was also recognised by Ministry of Home Affairs. Further,remarking upon BSF's human intelligence sources,the National Security Council Secretariat(NSCS) in their report to Government on kargil mentioned specifically that they were " by far the MOST SUPERIOR".
- Border management is an all encompassing term and border guarding is one aspect of wider concept of border management played by border guarding forces with other stake holders attached to it. For settled border it has to be border management and certainly border defence is most apt for unsettled borders to be dealt by Military.
-As far as naming and designation of various headquarters is concerned,certainly government need to take call on it.
Army need to be relieved from CI and CT role which is not their primary domain and everyone agrees that continued involvement effects professionalism. De-induction from secondary role will polish war fighting capabilities and also strengthen border defence of unsettled borders. CRPF and police are capable of taking on CI role along with other CAPFs and they need to be given that role independently . It is high time that Army solely focus on main role.
- In the interest of professionalism integral cadre is must in CAPFs, at all levels including at Apex levels, which has also been recommended by parliamentary committee.
There is professional requirement and need for Army to play a vital role. There is also need for theatrisation for optimum utilisation of resources ina professional manner and in that theatrisation army be the lead agency on all unsettled borders. CAPFs wherever deployed on unsettled border have to be under operational control of Army for better synergy and operational effectiveness.
The articles lucidly analyzes the ramifications of the Government's decision to deploy ITBP ON LAC
ReplyDeleteMaking ITBP as lead agency along LAC may have been relevant about two decades ago . Keeping in view the capabilities and strength PLA Theatre Command has deployed opposite LAC, ITBP alone can’t match PLA. There is a dire need of creating Theatre commands encompassing all resources of defence services, CAPF and security organisations to match PLA resources and effectively defeat its design along LAC.
ReplyDeleteGood decision, if approved. The mere concept that China is hostile and Army only can handle is a myth only. How Army has handled the Chinese agression in Doklam and Galwan whole country know. Chinese pe itrate 50 Kms inside and at the time of agreement they vacant only 25 , Thus occupying 25 KMs . It is the basic style of china to occupy other's territory. Indian Army Should be removed from CInOps in Kashmir and to be sent ahead in the form of Mountain Bde, rather than raising newand putting extra burden on nation. Now there is no need of Army in CI OPS in JnK and NE. Those who are advocating of deployment of Army on LAC are talking about Agression, Expansion and rapid deployment of PLA are forgetting that it took 48 day to the Army to deploy on borders during OPS Prakaram. When even Army was deployed in LAC , no miracle has happened rather than exposing ourselves to the PLA. So better deploy ITBP as BGF and withdraw Army from all CI roles and deploy them in the form.of mountain bde.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the garantee if ITBP/CAPFs deployed in areas opposite Chinese on LAC,they would react faster.To deploy ITBP on complete LAC seems a larger game plan to have more IPS officers on deputation by creating vacancies.Such thought process needs to be arrested, when it's a National Security issue
DeleteWhat we need today is a stronger Army with latest and better weaponry against the Chinese.This is the only language that Chinese understand .
The subject had many facets and need elaborate discussion on each and every aspects. Ground situation, infrastructure available and plan for future to be taken into consideration. These informations are not in public domain, hence those who are privy have to be involved. Our reactions to the situations in Doklam and Galwan can't be put as templates hence new procedures and tactics have to be evolved keeping the means for violent reaction capabilities devised by PLA.
ReplyDeleteIssue of ITBP under consideration to be made lead ageny along the Indo China will only come into play once the LAC and border issues between India & China are resolved & it gets the status of well defined dejure boundary, IB to be guarded by the BGF of both countries. China is likely to continue with LAC status alive to keep India always uncertain & unsure over its border & keep its forces and resources committed. To resolve or not to resolve the border issue with India entirely rests with China. It gives advantage and edge to China.It is only when China resolves the Border Issue, overcomes its misadventures, encroachments along the LAC, agrees to disengage it's regular army & works on guarging the IB with its Border adefence regiments following the protocols as done on other recognised borders. First & foremost, let the entire LAC become a proper IB, only then a Border Guarding Force like ITBP should be entrusted with the responsibilities of Lead agency to be dealing and handling with BGF on other side. With an adversary like China, it is all together a different situation. Sentiments & emotions will have to be overcome. Expecting China to show any leniency that may help India is very risky. To deal with China, we need to be talkingwith him from position of strength; collectively.
ReplyDelete