|
|
Expansion of Indian defence budget
Pakistan OBSERVER,
Tue, Mar,04, 2008.
Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema
Reports published in a leading Pakistani
newspaper recently revealed that India is planning to raise its defense
allocations by 8 to 10 per cent in this year’s budget. It is also assessed
that this amount may not please the Indian armed forces but it is viewed by
many as enough for gradual modernization of world’s fourth largest military.
Undoubtedly India is emerging as one of world biggest arms buyers and is also
planning one of its biggest ever arms purchases, a $10 billion deal to buy 126
fighter jets. However the intended increase is justified to meet the inflation
impact and is not viewed as substantial by the military analysts in India. ‘We
are falling short of the required budgetary support which does not augur well’
said the Director of New Delhi’s Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses.
It needs to be mentioned here that India raised its defense budget by 7.8 per
cent to $22 billion last year which would end in March 2008 as part of the
plan to modernize its 1.3 million strong military. Added increase would not
only cover the inflationary toll but would provide substantive amount for the
continuation of modernization drive. Not only such an amount would entice many
leading arms suppliers but would also generate fears for those continuously
living under the shadow of rapidly increasing might of the Indian military.
Compared to Pakistan’s total defense expenditure which was $4.14 billion US
dollars in 2006 and for the current year is $4.53 billion US dollars, the
Indian defense budget was $22.46 billion US dollars in 2006 and the currently
it is $28.5 US dollars. The proposed increase would indeed raise alarms among
all those countries which are not just apprehensive of Indian future designs
but have already suffered significantly at the hands of the Indians.
One of the important pre-requisites to analyze any country’s defense problems
is the identification of threats emanating either from external or internal
sources. The operative military doctrine and the existing force posture are
often designed to meet the perceived threats despite the unresolved
controversy whether the doctrine guides the evolution of force posture or
whether the converse is true.
The primary function of a military doctrine is to maximize the effectiveness
of a state’s military capabilities in support of national objectives. Not only
the national strategic objectives are invariably devised the country’s ruling
elite in consultation with the civil and military bureaucracies in almost all
the third world countries, but interpreting threats to the security is also
their prerogative.
To acquire desired level of military preparedness, the defense planner often
begins with the evaluation of manner and intensity of the perceived threats. A
comprehensive dossier on actual and potential adversaries is prepared
highlighting the adversary’s capabilities and intensions. The justification
for a certain level of resources-allocation is directly linked with the agreed
force posture and its accompanying weapon system.
There is no doubt that the high level of influence which the armed forces
enjoy in some countries often contributes towards the increased allocation. In
addition, there are countries that have ambitious agenda also manage to secure
regular increases in their defense budgets. Yet another factor that has
contributed towards regular increase in defense budgets is the existence and
influence of military industrial complex.
The armed forces both in India and Pakistan enjoy considerable influence over
the decision making processes. Compared to India, Pakistan has also remained
under military rule. However this does not mean that the Indian armed forces
do not enjoy considerable influence over the political decision making in
India. Ever since the India-Pakistan peace process started things were moving
relatively lesser pace than what was expected initially.
The recent phase has witnessed even more slowing down of the process and
increased influence of Indian armed forces in the dispute resolution
mechanism. For example the dispute over Siachin was nearly resolved in 1989
but the announcement of agreement was postponed because of political reasons
as Rajive Gandhi, who was then the incumbent Prime Minister, got scared of the
fact that the agreement may cost him votes. Consequently the resolution was
put on the hold until the advent of a more favorable climate.
Since the successful conclusion of 12th SAARC submits in Jan. 2004, not only
the relations between India and Pakistan have been gradually improving but the
overall atmosphere has vastly improved. Given the past history, the prevalent
atmosphere has never been as good as it is today yet one finds the injection
of frivolous notions and creation of undesired impediments.
After the passage of three successful years of peace process everybody was
expecting the resolution of the least complex dispute like the one on Siachin
yet in the fourth round of peace process the resolution was Siachin was
effectively impeded by the Indian armed forces.
The politically bosses easily gave in to the demands put by the military
leaders in India and the resolution of Siachin was once again put on the hold.
Many Indian analysts invariably project that the total defense allocation is
around 2.5 per cent of its gross domestic product (GDP) whereas is Pakistan’s
allocation is around 4 percent. It is obvious that percentage of defense
allocation in larger economy would be less. Japan GDP in 2007 was 4.65
trillion US dollars whereas India and Pakistan GDP in 2007 were 1.209 billion
and 144 billion US dollars respectively.
Given the regular increases in the Indian defense budgets and non-resolution
of main India-Pakistan disputes tend to generate pressures on Pakistan and it
would not be surprising to see the emergence voices stressing the need to
increase allocation to defense sector in order maintain minimal requisite
level to ward of Indian threats.
What the Indian planners need to realize that the increased gap in
conventional capabilities would not only inevitably generate sufficient
pressures on the Pakistani decision makers to allocate more at the cost of
development but would also reduce the time span from conventional to nuclear.
A large gap between two countries conventional capabilities could push
Pakistan to rely rather heavily upon its nuclear capability.
Admittedly India is viewing itself a global player and is preparing itself for
envisaged role but what it should realize is that more acquisition of
sophisticated weaponry might make its neighbors insecure. It is imperative for
the Indians to at least pay some respect to their neighbor’s sense of
insecurity. One way out of this quagmire is to quickly resolution the dispute
that has bedeviled relationships with their neighbors.
The writer works for Islamabad Policy research Institute.
|
|