IPKF sent without asking army

[FOX80]

SOURCE: Colombo Gazette

The decision to deploy the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka had been taken by the then Indian government without consulting the Indian army top brass, a former Indian Army Chief has said.

Former Army chief General V. P. Malik, who led the army at the time the IPKF was in Sri Lanka and was later withdrawn, said he was not consulted by the Indian political leadership when the decision was taken to send troops to fight the LTTE.

He slammed the political leadership for not involving the Army while making decisions on the nation’s security, saying the “lack of trust” between civil and military officials was affecting strategic policies, the Hindu newspaper reported.

Malik was speaking at the launch of his new book India’s Military Conflicts and Diplomacy: An Inside View of Decision Making.

He said the decision making process in India is “fractured”, which leaves out many stake-holders associated with the issue.

Malik’s book talks about some strategic events in which he was personally involved during his long service with the Indian Army

 

[Sergi]

I am sorry General Malik Sir but I dont think its army's job to make decidsions on political matter.
Arent we having one neighbour who's army is involoved in decision making ??? That should be enough reason to NOT do so.

As far as consulting is concerned PMO mighht have been more than sure that Indian Army could do the job.

Keeping army out of politics has paid India well and it should continue like that.

 

[Android]

Civilian control of military is fine but keeping military leadership completely out of decision making process is insanity. I don't know whether it is due to plain stupidity or paranoia of our civilian leadership of military takeover god only knows

 

[Indo-guy]

Civilian control of military is fine but keeping military leadership completely out of decision making process is insanity. I don't know whether it is due to plain stupidity or paranoia of our civilian leadership of military takeover god only knows

I don't think anybody is paranoid of military take over ...it has got largely to do with arrogance of politicos and bureaucracy....

Fortunately ...military have been assertive now-a-days ....

It's been obvious with respect to the issue of withdrawal of AFPSA from J & K ...

 

[Sergi]

Civilian control of military is fine but keeping military leadership completely out of decision making process is insanity. I don't know whether it is due to plain stupidity or paranoia of our civilian leadership of military takeover god only knows

Its called line of seperation and NOT paranoia. Is it our army's mandate to participate in decision making process ???
Consulting can be done and should be done. But it must not be made the responsibility of civilian government.
End of the day army is a weapon and GoI is user. There is reason why few basic rights are denied to uniform.

 

[[Bregs]]

Army has to decide the operational aspect of there deployment and decision to deploy army or not is political always

 

[janon]

I am sorry General Malik Sir but I dont think its army's job to make decidsions on political matter.
Arent we having one neighbour who's army is involoved in decision making ??? That should be enough reason to NOT do so.

As far as consulting is concerned PMO mighht have been more than sure that Indian Army could do the job.

Keeping army out of politics has paid India well and it should continue like that.

It is not about who's decision it is - obviously it has to be the decision of the civilian leadership, not of the army brass. But before that decision is taken, there has to be a lot of consultations with the top brass of all three services. That will mean that by the time the go ahead is given, the army would have drawn up detailed operational plans, which is a recipe for success. If you take the decision first and then tell the army to go, it will mean that the army leadership and troops are ill prepared, plans will have to be drawn hastily, exact objectives will be unclear and so on, which will lead to military disasters and a grand SNAFU. Which is what happened.

The former army chief is not complaining that the decision was not his to make - rather, he is bemoaning the fact that he and the rest of the military leadership was kept out of the loop during the decision making process.

To give an example - before the USA goes on an overseas campaign, there are wide consultations between the president, defence secretary and the military brass, so that by the time the go ahead is given, there will be detailed plans about which marine expeditionary unit should attack from where, which divisions should roll through which axis, what targets need to be bombed in an air and submarine campaign before the ground offensive starts, and so on. When war is declared, or a go ahead is given for military ops to begin, the troops on the ground would be 'ready to roll'. And the generals would have a clear idea of the objective of the war.

On the other hand, when our troops went to Sri Lanka, the military had no clue what they were trying to accomplish. Which is why what began as a peacekeeping force soon devolved into warfighting with the very people we had trained and equipped to fight. Peacekeepers turning into warfighters - is there a worse example of mission change? The military went in with the attitude of

'Ours not to make reply, Ours not to reason why, ours but to do and die.'

That attitude ended disastrously for the light brigade in the crimean war (in memory of whom the poem was penned), and the Sri Lanka campaign ended ignominously for us.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I am sorry General Malik Sir but I dont think its army's job to make decidsions on political matter.
Arent we having one neighbour who's army is involoved in decision making ??? That should be enough reason to NOT do so.

As far as consulting is concerned PMO mighht have been more than sure that Indian Army could do the job.

Keeping army out of politics has paid India well and it should continue like that.

Sure... so how many casualities did ipkf take in tht conflict?



(which india created)...

 

[Sergi]

It is not about who's decision it is - obviously it has to be the decision of the civilian leadership,not of the army brass.

We are on same page.

But before that decision is taken, there has to be a lot of consultations with the top brass of all three services. That will mean that by the time the go ahead is given, the army would have drawn up detailed operational plans, which is a recipe for success. If you take the decision first and then tell the army to go, it will mean that the army leadership and troops are ill prepared, plans will have to be drawn hastily, exact objectives will be unclear and so on, which will lead to military disasters and a grand SNAFU. Which is what happened.

so you think army just move when orders fly from PMO ???
Again , what to do is PMOs job. How to do is - Army's.

The former army chief is not complaining that the decision was not his to make - rather, he is bemoaning the fact that he and the rest of the military leadership was kept out of the loop during the decision making process.

Sorry that sound like a complaint to me. Read my second post about consulting or I just write it down again for you. They should and would consult army but in any case it must not be made the responsibility of civilian govt.

To give an example - before the USA goes on an overseas campaign, there are wide consultations between the president, defence secretary and the military brass, so that by the time the go ahead is given, there will be detailed plans about which marine expeditionary unit should attack from where, which divisions should roll through which axis, what targets need to be bombed in an air and submarine campaign before the ground offensive starts, and so on. When war is declared, or a go ahead is given for military ops to begin, the troops on the ground would be 'ready to roll'. And the generals would have a clear idea of the objective of the war.

we just responded to help call. It was a peace keeping force. Not invading one.

On the other hand, when our troops went to Sri Lanka, the military had no clue what they were trying to accomplish.

they do reach Jafana.

Which is why what began as a peacekeepiing force soon devolved into warfighting with the very people we had trained and equipped to fight. The military went in with the attitude of

'Ours not to make reply, Ours not to reason why, ours but to do and die.'

That attitude ended disastrously for the light brigade in the crimean war (in memory of whom the poem was penned), and the Sri Lanka campaign ended ignominously for us.

Same happened to US forces in Mogadishu. Ground realities do change rapidly.

Lets for sec assume then PM decided to consult COAS , what he would have said ??? Any PM ???
If he needed a advice he has advisers. He doesn't need the COAS for that.

All PM can do is tell his COAS about the decision and prepare to follow ASAP

Sure... so how many casualities did ipkf take in tht conflict?



(which india created)...

Less than the amount PA faced in WOT

( which Pak partnered )
I can do that too. So why not we both cut that and keep it to civilised discussion ???

 

[scorpionx]

IPKF was not prepared for the job it had been assigned to. Operational aspects,proper training for jungle warfare and arrangement of equipments needed time. But it was the job for the Army brass to inform the Civilian government about the intricacies of these operations. If you need time just say it on the face the politico brass just like Sam Manekshaw did in 1971.Complaining after so many years sounds ludicrous.

 

[Sergi]

IPKF was not prepared for the job it had been assigned to. Operational aspects,proper training for jungle warfare and arrangement of equipments needed time. But it was the job for the Army brass to inform the Civilian government about the intricacies of these operations. If you need time just say it on the face the politico brass just like Sam Manekshaw did in 1971.Complaining after so many years sounds ludicrous.

Exactly.
Actually what Manekshaw said is the answer to this situation. Can you reproduce it here ???
It was something" if you say let there be a war , there will be a war " i cant remember full.

 

[asad71]

Rajiv was not his mom.A brash young man, many things went amiss during his watch. A seasoned leader would have consulted the Service chiefs beside others before deciding to launch Op Pawan.

 

[Indo-guy]

Its called line of seperation and NOT paranoia. Is it our army's mandate to participate in decision making process ???
Consulting can be done and should be done. But it must not be made the responsibility of civilian government.
End of the day army is a weapon and GoI is user. There is reason why few basic rights are denied to uniform.

Government and military are like different of the organs of same body ...entrusted wit different functions ....
what separates them is also what unites them ....

Two way communication is essential for any optimal harmonious functioning ....

the very fact that former military brass is complaining ...underles the fact that military was not taken into confidence and was not consulted ....which is one of the reasons for debacle .

I am surprised by your assertions that Government is not obliged to consult armed forces .

I believe government is obliged to listen to all and the act ....

or else it turn into a kind of dictatorship ....

what if government goes ahead with scrapping of AFSPA from J & K under political compulsion without taking army's reservations into account ....won't that spell disster for J & K ???

same thing happened with IPKF ??? Ill advised government forced its decision on Army which only resulted in worst kind of peace keeping drubbing ???

India lost in every sense in this ill advised move ....

The prime reason : stake holders were not consulted .....


Please don't advocate something as foolish as this , under guise of so called separation of powers and functions !

 

[scorpionx]

Exactly.
Actually what Manekshaw said is the answer to this situation. Can you reproduce it here ???
It was something" if you say let there be a war , there will be a war " i cant remember full.

In Sam's words "I explained, that the first book, the first chapter, the first words, the first sentence God said was,
“Let there be light” and there was light. Now you say, “Let there be war” and there will be war, but are you prepared? I am certainly not. This is the end of April. The Himalayan passes are opening and there can be an attack from China if China gives us an ultimatum."

After everybody left the room,he said

“Yes! It is my job to tell you the truth” I responded, “and it is my job to fight, it is my job to fight to win and I have to tell you the truth.”

.....................................................

Actually this was the very reason too behind the 1962 fiasco,if you remember. Too many yes mans in the war cabinet costed humiliation which was rectified in 1965,but unfortunately repeated again during 1986-1987.

 

[Sashan]

Rajiv might have felt that sending IPKF was the right thing to do considering the circumstances. There were rumours swirling that SL might offer a base to US in Trincomalee. Once you send the troops, you have to leave the decision making to the officers in the field. Rather the decisions were made at Chennai and Delhi. They never understood the ground realities and that started the whole mess. For example, IPKF warned about the folly of handing over 19 LTTE leaders to SL army and the warning was ignored by the brass sitting in India. That is what started the Guerilla warfare by LTTE against IPKF.