Despite national security having emerged as a major political issue in the last few general elections, India has failed to yet formulate a National Security Strategy (NSS). The recent remark by Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), General Anil Chauhan that “such a document actually doesn’t count” has triggered a fresh debate about the desirability and importance of a NSS document. General Chauhan said that the absence of a written national strategic policy does not imply that the country lacks a strategic policy.

In his opinion, a NSS consists of policy, processes, and practices to succeed, and India addresses all three effectively. He argued that in the absence of a strategic policy, the country would not have been successful in revoking the special status of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370, or carrying out Uri and Balakot strikes. General Chauhan’s remarks may be partly correct, but that cannot be a substitute for a more formal approach to national security, which is always preferred in most democratic countries without exception.

Advertisement

The advantages of a written and robust NSS providing a clear strategic direction cannot be simply brushed aside. A NSS is a foundational document that delineates the countries’ broader security goals based on an objective assessment of present security threats and future challenges. It spells out clear strategic direction and implementation plans; and identifies and synergises military, economic, diplomatic, and other resources needed to achieve the defined goals in a coordinated manner within the constitutional and legal framework, based on a broader political consensus.

A NSS also provides institutional mechanisms for regular review and updating of national security policy. It provides an opportunity for consultation with all stakeholders and experts. The NSS generally takes a comprehensive approach to the notion of security, encompassing domestic and external challenges and addressing both traditional military threats and non-traditional security challenges. It always emphasises harmonising the efforts and pooling the resources of different agencies responsible for national security on a shared agenda. For over two decades, a number of governmental committees and think-tanks have been continuously advocating, though unsuccessfully, for a formal NSS.

For instance, the Kargil Review Committee (2000) emphasised that national security cannot be handled as a part time vocation; instead, it requires full-time attention. The committee stated that “the political, bureaucratic, military, and intelligence establishments appear to have developed a vested interest in the status quo.” Similarly, the Naresh Chandra Task Force on National Security (2012) highlighted the hollowness of the national security decision making process and underlined the need for a formal NSS to guide security reforms.

In 2018, the present Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government itself tasked the Defence Planning Committee (DPC), chaired by the National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, with three Services Chiefs (the Army, Navy and Air Force) and Secretaries of Defence, Foreign Affairs and Expenditure being its members, to formulate the draft of the NSS. Unfortunately, these suggestions have been disregarded, and we have failed to adopt a formal NSS.

Several reasons are ascribed to India’s NSS hesitancy. It is feared that a declared NSS will adversely affect our relations with both friends and foes, as it will reveal India’s stand on various issues of national security. Further, it is believed that a NSS will make the government’s decision-making process concerning national security more straightjacketed and will hurt strategic flexibility. If the strategy is defined, the government would be forced to act accordingly when a security contingency arises. The government and politicians, of all hues, fear that a NSS will enforce accountability.

The lack of political consensus on national security issues is yet another major impediment. However, most of these reasons are based on misplaced apprehensions and fallacies. It is more due to the lack of political confidence and uncertainty about the necessity and benefits of such a written and formal NSS. It must be underlined that a vast country like India that aspires to enhance its global influence and to shape the future of the international order, and that faces myriad security challenges, both external and internal, cannot defer having a NSS indefinitely.

The absence of a NSS has left decision-making on vital national security issues in the hands of a transient bureaucracy, lacking expertise. In the absence of a NSS, the only document issued by the government that provides explicit political directions to the military is the Raksha Mantri’s Operational Directive. This document is to be reviewed and revised at least every five years, but it has not been done even once since its approval in 2009, though the world has changed dramatically since then.

The absence of political direction and strategic guidance for the armed forces could prove to be risky and hazardous. Our defence forces need to be provided with clear and better directives. The NSS brings strategic clarity as all the stakeholders know what is expected of them. The failure to have a NSS has badly affected much-needed national security reforms like the proposed reorganisation of the military into tri-service integrated theatre commands (ITCs), which intend to combine the financial, material and overall operational capabilities of the Army, Air Force, and Navy. In 2022, former Chief of the Army Staff General Manoj Mukund Naravane publicly lamented the absence of a NSS.

He said that “unless there is a NSS in place, to just keep talking about theaterisation is actually putting the cart before the horse.” We should not forget that almost all major powers of the world that have the capabilities to influence the course of world politics, including the US, UK, France, China, and Russia, have their own formal NSS documents that are regularly reviewed and updated to meet the changing security dynamics and priorities. In the US, it is mandatory for the government to publish a formal “National Security Strategy” document signed by the President. In 2022, even Pakistan, one of our major adversaries, released its first national security policy document.

We are faced with a very complex and unpredictable global strategic and security landscape that requires adopting an integrated but multidimensional, comprehensive, and long-term approach to national security. Surviving these challenging times and the precarious international environment requires that we move from strategic uncertainty to strategic clarity. A holistic and well-thought-out NSS, that can withstand the ravages of time, could play an important role in this direction. It is crucial to meet current and future security challenges. A written NSS with clear and defined security objectives will help avoid taking shortterm, ad hoc, hasty, and regime centric decisions on important national security issues.

It will also prevent different arms of the government responsible for national security from working in silos and drifting in divergent directions when they are required to act in unison. Drawing up a NSS must be at the top of the agenda of the new government. Any further delay could be perilous. Previous exercises undertaken to formulate a NSS could serve as a useful starting point. A NSS is a must for the country’s transformation into a “modern, prosperous, and secure country,” as former National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon puts it. As a rising power, India must articulate its world views, reflecting our values and beliefs, and redefine its place through a wellcrafted NSS

(The writer is Professor and Head, Department of Strategic and Security Studies, Aligarh Muslim University)