No Cognitive Warfare is Not the Military Charter, Combat Power Is

Combat power comprises of three essential elements firepower, maneouvre and protection. Generating combat power is the primary task of a military which is a sum total of the three elements combined with highly trained and motivated soldiers, sailors and airmen in pursuit of a viable national aim and an effective miliary strategy.

Perception of efective combat power will also lead to deterrence and thus avoidance of war, which is the essential role of the Indian armed forces with the corollary to be able to win a war if forced upon to do so.

For this purpose, singular focus on combat power is essential which is a complex process beyond the issue of Acceptance of Necessity [AON] which does not really translate immediately into increasing deterrence except in the domestic public context where the uninitiated are unaware of the long time lag between AON to a fielding of the weapon system in the military. In some cases, this may as in the case of the induction of combat fighter aircraft in the Indian Air Force extend over decades.

The military also has to reform organisations for contemporary warfighting conditions. Jointness is a one phrase that has been used very frequently not just by the military but by the Prime Minister Mr Narendra Modi himself which is seen as the pathway to a theatre command. Despite all that has been written and debated for the past two and a half decades plus when the idea was first mooted, theatre command as well as jointness remain nowhere in sight.

The status appears to be that the proposal is before the Cabinet Committee on Security [CCS]. For a proposal to get through the CCS there is a necessity for this to be complete in all respects examining each angle not just the military but also financial and possibly even the political of empowering theatre commanders with combined powers over resources of the three services.  As of now it is not clear what is leading to delays so we will wait for more details to emerge.

Character of warfare has changed we are told in multiple forums from conclaves to podcasts and media debates. Drones and missiles are seen to be the key tools of waging war. Though this may be a questionable notion there is no unified doctrine for employment of drones or missiles except Multi Domain Operations issued by HQ Integrated Defence Staff. Does it have agency of the three services is unclear.

The long introduction to the subject of the current debate – relevance of cognitive warfare for the military and the amount of being send by the armed forces on this subject which is no doubt important in todays media and information rich universe but peripheral to military function. However, that is for the national security manager to develop capabilities to generate and counter in what in simpler words is enemy propaganda.

For the military subversion of the minds of officers and soldiers is the main concern and despite the information surge which is also evident in the closely guarded information curtain. Running efficient administration at all levels from the sub unit to the unit a ship or the air station and above is the most effective antidote against subversion. While it may be difficult to keep every discontented element in the forces from speaking up against the establishment, the cause is likely to be his personal grievance rather than influence of an enemy agent.

An over emphasis on cognitive warfare is not only driving the military from focusing on the main role and task but also infringing on domains which are the preserve of other national security managers and may also lead to accusations of political influence.

Focus on combat power will not only overcome these insinuations but also earn the respect of the nation of performing the task on a heavily contested Line of Control and Line of Actual Control avoiding some of the ignominies which recur frequently.