India’s 64th Republic Day celebrations threw up some interesting points to consider for those who are responsible for the country’s security. As always, the parade in New Delhi down Rajpath stressed the Indian state’s military might. Several observers have remarked on the dissonance between this show of state-led unity and the recent memory of young protesters being tear-gassed and subjected to water cannons in the same location — Rajpath, the heart of the state’s authority. But, nevertheless, the Republic Day parade remains an essential guide to how India looks at itself, not just culturally through its floats and performances but through its reinforcing of the state’s ability to do its core job of providing security to its citizens.
The parade began with a flypast of four freshly purchased Mi-17V5 helicopters. This set the tone for the proceedings, in which several new defence systems were displayed to the watching public, in New Delhi, on Indian television and, of course, worldwide. India’s military bureaucracy, of course, has long been criticised for its inability to update the military arsenal with speed and efficiency, and it appears that, at long last, it has moved to answer some of that criticism. The parade was dominated, perhaps, by the sight of the huge ballistic missile Agni-5, which rolled down Rajpath majestically on its privately built mobile launch pad. The air force, meanwhile, displayed a new training aircraft – the purchase of which was long overdue – and also the expensive transport aeroplane, the C-17 Globemaster. The navy’s tableau featured INS Chakra, a nuclear submarine leased from the Russians, as well as the as-yet-undelivered and long-expected Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier, soon to be renamed INS Vikramaditya. It is important to note, however, that much of this new equipment is a result of single-vendor negotiation or of indigenisation. As yet, the military bureaucracy has been unable to create an efficient and transparent system for competition among private vendors. It is also important to note that the essential step for a soldier-heavy army like India’s is not big, military showpieces, but mass-produced equipment that will protect and empower India’s fighting men. India’s army cannot continue to be a light infantry force, with occasional sets of strike-capable fighters. The private sector must be tapped to ensure Indian soldiers’ personal weaponry and armour are brought into the 21st century.
Striking, too, was the contrast between the strength of the Indian security in terms of heavy weaponry to protect its borders, and its weakness internally. The prime minister, for example, was surrounded by what seemed like dozens of gun-toting commandos even in the heart of what should have been a fully secured Rajpath. The president’s picturesque cavalcade of bodyguards remains a reminder that the old, historic horse-drawn coach has been replaced by a bullet-proof limousine for the short, heavily secured trip down Raisina Hill. The ostentatious display of protection around India’s leaders is unsightly, underlining the serious internal security concerns that need to be addressed, in a country that witnesses the world’s largest exercise in free and fair elections. And it is a reminder that the state’s duty to protect must look inward as well as out. The holes in India’s external security are being filled. The gaps in the state’s ability to protect and secure within its borders too need to be bridged.