The training of Agniveers commenced on 2 January, 2023 in all three services. In order to ensure optimum utilisation of the four-year tenure of the Agniveers, the Army has evolved a 31-week training programme to include 10 weeks of Basic Military Training (BMT) and 21 weeks of Advanced Military Training (AMT), which is arm/service and trade specific. This will be followed by six weeks of on-the-job training in the units. In the earlier training model, the BMT was of 15 weeks duration and the AMT varied from 6 to 18 months for different arms and services.
Critics had cited the reduced training period effecting operational efficiency as one of the main shortcomings of the Agnipath scheme. How has the Army planned to overcome the perceived drop in operational efficiency due to the truncated training period? What more can be done to improve the quality of training?
Also read: Army’s most potent weapon against China on Indian borders—human force
Pitfalls of the existing training system
The Army’s existing BMT of 15 weeks and AMT of 6-18 months duration was long due for an overhaul. It was based on an archaic methodology with little or no use of modern training aids and simulators. Despite several recommendations made over the years, the reforms remained unimplemented. A Systems Approach to Training, which is followed by all modern armies, was not implemented. Terminal and enabling objectives were not clearly defined and ethical validation was not carried out. More subjects were added without dropping the superfluous ones. There was overemphasis on drill, theory and academic education, and limited practical training. Firing and field craft, sine qua non of combat, standards were abysmally low.
Situation with respect to AMT in technical arms/services, artillery, air defence and mechanised forces was a little better due to the technical nature of the trade-specific training but was still prolonged due to poor methodology and lack of simulators. The AMT for the Infantry, which faces the most imponderables in combat, suffered from all the shortcoming highlighted above. The system had become so entrenched that it became an essential part of regimentation itself. Barely average standards were achieved and the young soldiers had to be retrained in the units.
The situation in the units/formations was no better. Refresher/continuity training is not based on a systems approach and also suffers due to operational and peacetime administrative commitments. Lack of training aids and simulators is even more pronounced. Critics of the Agnipath scheme have highlighted that a soldier takes 5-6 years to be fully trained. Given the current training culture and methodology, I have no reason to disagree. And the end-result still remains below par.
An anecdote will prove my point. In 1997, the Army Training Command prepared an exceptionally far-sighted training note on Systems Approach to Training. The intent was to radically transform the approach to training. In 1998-99, as the Brigadier General Staff of a Corps, I facilitated its execution with excellent results. However, soon everyone forgot about it and regressed to normal. In 2003, as the Director General Of Military Training, I sent the same note to all Commands asking for progress and their views. There was no progress. All Commands, including the Army Training Command, which by then had forgotten that it was the originator of the concept, responded that it was a good idea that needs to be implemented.
As an Army Commander, I carried out a study for the Army to overhaul the training of Infantry recruits in 2008. As a result, Systems Approach to Training was introduced, but not in letter and spirit. The training period was reduced from 36 weeks to 30 weeks, a week less than what has been standardised now. Little or no progress was made with respect to simulators, modern training aids and teaching methodology.
Also read: Army ‘rightsizing’ just a clever play of words. It’s about choosing technology over soldiers
Evaluation of the Army’s reformed training programme
Ten weeks of BMT and 21 weeks of AMT in my view are adequate and compare favourably with most modern armies. However, for it to succeed, it must be based on the Systems Approach to Training with ethical validation, must be backed with modern training aids and simulators for all weapons and tactical situations, and must be of an intense nature. The training must be practical and based on “how to do” for field craft/tactics/first aid and “how to use” for weapons. The instructional staff must undergo a methods and psychological orientation and there should be no abuse and punishment in barracks. The prevailing culture of training through subjugation — surest way to demotivate trainees and kill initiative forever — must stop.
Motivation to train is a very important factor. Since most Agniveers will be and should be deployed in active operational and counter-insurgency areas, the punchline should be — ‘train as your life depends on it’. Empirically, this has been the motivation for truncated war time recruit training and most wars were won by such soldiers. Same is being successfully exploited by the Ukrainian Army.
AMT of 21 weeks may be inadequate for some technical trades. It can be partially overcome by on-job-trainning. Moreover, the number of Agniveers joining a unit annually is relatively small. Once a Agniveer is regularised after four years, their skills can be further improved by an advanced course as is the norm even now.
Also read: Pakistan again cultivating Lashkar, Jaish as loyal proxies. And why China’s got its back
What has the Army done and what more it can do?
The stringent all India all class merit driven recruitment/selection system has by default improved the intake. Even though minimum education standards are Class 10 and 10+2, a large number of graduates (including technical graduates), Industrial Training Institutes diploma holders and individuals with relatively higher EQ have been inducted. This will help reduce training time, adaptation to technology and reduction in academic training time.
Systems Approach to Training has been introduced in letter and spirit. 500 simulators have been sourced and more are being procured through the fast-track route. Indigenously developed Combat Weapon Training Simulator enables simulated firing of all weapons in varying tactical situations in all types of terrain. This simulator is a game changer. State of the art training aids have also been introduced. Training is of an intense nature. Simulator and practical training has replaced prolonged theoretical training. Extensive use is also being made of vehicle, weapon systems and tactical simulators during AMT.
Motivation has been the forte of the Indian Army. A systematic effort is being put in to keep the Agniveers motivated. Training through subjugation has empirically been the norm in the military. Such an approach is not in tune with development of leadership. A cultural change is required to overcome this problem.
There is a need to train the trainer in methods of modern instruction. There is also a need for psychological training of the instructors to prevent them from replicating their own past experience.
The transformation of training, as has been initiated for the Agniveers, must also be extended to the units and formations. Refresher and continuity training within the units is an annual feature, both for individual and collective training. There is need for the introduction of simulators and modern training aids. Corps/Division Battle Schools, where all such training is carried out, must have state-of-the-art facilities. Special attention needs to be given to battle schools carrying out induction training for operational/counter insurgency/high altitude areas.
Dedicated academies for Non-Commissioned Officers and Junior Commissioned Officers is a void the Army needs to fill. The capacity of present courses is limited and unit promotion cadres are sub-standard.
The compulsions of the Agnipath scheme offered the Army an opportunity to transform its approach to training. It is heartening to note that this opportunity has been seized in concept. The challenge now lies in execution to make it succeed, and also extend it to field formations. I have no doubts that this approach is a game changer.
Lt Gen H S Panag PVSM, AVSM (R) served in the Indian Army for 40 years. He was GOC in C Northern Command and Central Command. Post retirement, he was Member of Armed Forces Tribunal. Views are personal.
(Edited by Anurag Chaubey)