What should defence expenditure priorities be?

Having wasted the first budget opportunity in 2014 after BJP assumed power by staying with what may be called a continuation budget, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley did a better job the second time around. He was particularly realistic in increasing the defence allocations so marginally to Rs 2,46,727 crores (from Rs 2,29,000 crores), i.e., by a mere 7-odd % as to barely take care of inflation. Indeed, going by past patterns — inflation plus 5%-7% is the norm. Indeed, Jaitley, pointedly increased the defence capital budget not at all — staying locked in virtually at last year’s level of Rs 94,588 crores (up by a measly Rs 0.5 crores to round out the figure!). In effect, it leaves little money for the kind of procurements programmes the military has lined up. In this situation there’s a critical necessity for a high-level mechanism to determine the armed forces acquisition priorities inter se, which need I first articulated in my classified report as adviser, defence expenditure, to the 10th Finance Commission in 1995 and have been publicly iterating for the last exactly 20 years, around budget time!! With each service believing it cannot do without every last item on its wish list and always holding out the dire consequences for national security if it is not realized in full, it ends up as an unending farce.

In the circumstances, what exactly should the defence spending inter se priorities be? The principle for service-wise allocation should be urgently to meet the requirements for the China front — (1) light, air transportable, howitzers for mountain use, (2) C3 and data fusion in a nationally networked grid for the army and air force entities — tactically-deployed forward units, brigade and Division HQrs, and theatre commands to plug into, (3) accelerated equipping and positioning of the mountain strike corps for offensive ops on the Tibetan plateau, (4) 192-strong force of light utility helicopters, (5) raising of two additional Brahmos-II land cruise missile regiments, and (6) speedy augmentation of the Su-30MKI force (by ditching the Rafale for once and for all) and its massed deployment for use on the elongated front from Aksai Chin to Arunachal. These priorities to proceed along with the build-up of the nuclear and conventional submarine strength, in the main. But if past is guide, these will not be the priorities and the defence rupee will be squandered.

About Bharat Karnad

Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi, he was Member of the (1st) National Security Advisory Board and the Nuclear Doctrine-drafting Group, and author, among other books of, 'Nuclear Weapons and Indian Security: The Realist Foundations of Strategy', 'India's Nuclear Policy' and most recently, 'Why India is Not a Great Power (Yet)'. Educated at the University of California (undergrad and grad), he was Visiting Scholar at Princeton University, University of Pennsylvania, the Shanghai Institutes of International Studies, and Henry L. Stimson Center, Washington, DC.
This entry was posted in Asian geopolitics, China, China military, civil-military relations, domestic politics, Geopolitics, Great Power imperatives, India's China Policy, India's strategic thinking and policy, Indian Air Force, Indian Army, Indian ecobomic situation, Indian Navy, Military Acquisitions, Missiles, Nuclear Policy & Strategy, Nuclear Weapons, South Asia, Tibet, Weapons. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to What should defence expenditure priorities be?

  1. Edelbert Kmenlang Badwar says:

    You advocate ditching the Rafale and acquiring more Sukhois. But as seen in recent events, the Sukhois also have problems of their own.It will be like putting all our eggs in one basket.In fact in place of the hyperexpensive Rafales we could get by if the Air force inducts more squadrons of Tejas until the stealth FGFA arrives.

    • Re: badwar@ — Tejas, Mk-II, would be the best option, yes, with the follow-on FGFA and AMCA on the anvil. But, in the meanwhile, more of the economical Su-30 MKIs are a necessity.

  2. ~!@#$%^&*()_+ says:

    You must be happy with the capital budget. No budgeting for Rafale. Congrats.

    Su-30MKI had a very high availability rate during the air ex. in US some years back. The unit cost at which Su30MKI is available MoD should be able to budget for a substantial amount of extra spares. The fact that availability (~55%) is low at present, implies poor spares management and merely on account of spares we should be able to get say ~30% of the MKI fleet back up. Add another order of 40 MKIs and immediate IAF needs should be met.

    LCA however remains the main thing needed to maintain the bite.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.