The encounter of four suspected Jaish-e-Mohammad militants by Jammu and Kashmir Police at Nagrota on 19 November and subsequent discovery of a tunnel — supposedly used by these militants to cross over to India from Pakistan — in Samba area has once again started the debate around command and control of the border-guarding forces or the BGFs. A similar debate had erupted in May this year after the Chinese intrusion in Galwan Valley. Many retired Army officers have taken to social media to strongly advance the case for placing the BGFs under the command of the Army.
Laxity on part of the Border Security Force (BSF) is being alleged as the reason for the tunnel construction and militant intrusion. It is nobody’s case that the responsibility for such lapses should not be fixed. However, a few questions beg answers.
Intelligence lapse?
First, the circumstances of the encounter indicate that the police had access to minute-to-minute information about the moves of the militants. It can, therefore, be concluded that the agencies knew about the existence of the tunnel and the militants using it to cross over. If that is the case, then why was the information not shared with the BSF? Had that been done, the militants could have been intercepted at the very first stage itself without the risk of them being lost in the vast countryside.
Second, keeping in view the sensitivity of the International Border (IB) in Jammu, the vigil has been increased with the deployment of the Army in the second tier — if militants breach the BSF’s first tier, they can be intercepted by the Army. What then explains the breach of this second tier of security? How is the transfer of command to the Army going to help?
Resorting to blame game and tinkering with well-established systems, therefore, should be avoided. The aim should be to identify and rectify mistakes.
Instead of indulging in a turf war, we should analyse our attitude towards security of borders in general and fill gaps so that such incidents are minimised in future.
Also read: IPS Abhinav Kumar’s allegations baseless. CAPF cadre officers fighting an existential battle
One border one force
The Group of Ministers (GoM) set up after the Kargil war had mandated the principles of ‘One Border One Force’ and ‘One task one Force’. As a result, the BGFs were relieved of their internal security responsibilities and deployed as per their original mandate of guarding the borders. The BSF, which primarily conducted anti-militancy operations in J&K, was relieved by the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) early last decade.
However, over the years, this principle has been diluted to a great extent with BGFs being frequently withdrawn from borders and deployed for internal security and election purposes. Nowadays, every requirement of troops for internal security requires thinning of BGF troops from the border. Consequently, the vigil on the border gets heavily diluted.
One can sympathise with the government because internal security issues have cropped up in large parts of the country, necessitating heavy deployment of forces. The gravity of situation can be assessed from the fact that as many as two frontiers’ strength (over 15,000 troops) of BSF are deployed in anti-Naxal operations in central India, besides deployment for anti-infiltration duties in J&K.
The requirement of additional forces for smooth conduct of elections is understandable. However, withdrawing forces for a long duration for conduct of even minor elections like Tripura Tribal Council (TTC) or Panchayat elections in states and now for District Development Council (DDC) elections in J&K amounts to downgrading the importance of securing our borders. The forces are not only withdrawn, but continue to remain away for long durations — the 2018 Panchayat elections in Kashmir was one such instance. Large number of troops have been reportedly withdrawn even from the sensitive Jammu border for the DDC elections.
Such thinning out, coupled with other accentuating factors —general shortage of manpower (on an average each unit is said to be deficient of about 100 personnel), limited technology access, excessive attachment of soldiers with higher supervisory headquarters and commitments like annual raising day and Republic Day parade — are constant challenges that the BGFs face. Covid, this year, has taken an additional toll.
Predictability of operational methodology, too, has contributed to suboptimal vigil along India’s borders. Despite these challenges, the fact that the enemy is compelled to take tunnels and use drones, instead of adopting surface route, points towards effectiveness of domination by BSF and the fence. However, use of technology and more effective domination of areas across the fence is likely to yield better results.
Also read: Neo-nationalism defends Army’s rogue actions, but clean human rights record is key
The tunnel problem
The area in J&K where the tunnel has been detected has thick foliage spread, both on the Indian as well as Pakistani side. This makes it easy for the Pakistanis to disperse the dug earth without being detected even by a drone. The same method has been adopted in the past. The average depth at which these tunnels are dug is about 10 feet or more and, therefore, cannot be detected from the surface.
While one cannot do anything about the foliage on the Pakistani side, it is possible to manage it on one’s own side. Areas where the land belongs to private persons are clear of the foliage. It’s the government land or unused land that is the problem. The BSF neither has funds nor the implements to clear such vegetation. And why should the land lie idle? If it is government land, it can be used for some useful purpose.
Most importantly, the intelligence branch of the BSF must reorient to collect information related to border crimes, instead of deciphering the intentions and plans of other security agencies.
Secure borders are crucial to the security of the nation. Proper border guarding and management, therefore, is particularly important in context of our western borders, where Pakistan’s focus is to destabilise us by exploiting our fault lines. We must realise that border guarding/management is not a single agency function. We must concentrate on foiling all attempts to breach our borders through coordinated efforts, instead of indulging in futile debates.
Sanjiv Krishnan Sood @sood_2 is a retired additional director general of Border Security Force. Views are personal.
THEN Why not army manning Jammu and Kashmir LOC.
BSF doing better than army that to without pension, ex servicemen status. Without equal pays and allowances.
Tenure policy of army is hard for 2 years and 4 yeras peace but whereas bsf always on borders.
Dude, get high less often and maybe you’ll get some facts right
BSF is amongst the best border guarding forces. One or two successful infiltrations cannot take away the credit from BSF of preventing 100s of infiltrations. Regarding Army for border duty. We know what happened in Kargil two decades back. Army was caught sleeping. It would never have happened if BSF was guarding the border
Good highlights of the issues involved. Has the MSM reported this aspect. It’s real stuff like this which should be focus of social media users instead of discussion of fake propoganda of parties. Solidarity & good wishes to all fighting forces and hope the political master’s support properly.
When they say that BSF should be put under the command of Army …it can be done…..so that intrusion like Kargil happens again, as it happened in command and control area of Army…..or failures like Pathankot, Uri etc gets repeated.
BSF has a lot of achievements in its account, specially during peak of militancy in Kashmir, Punjab, Assam etc, succesful foiling of attacks at Srinagar airport, Baramulla fidayeen attack. Also, posts occupied by BSF didn’t get intruded during Kargil intrusion in Kashmir.
BSF only needs to be commanded by its cadre officers, devoid of IPS cadre. However, some highly decorated officers of Army may be inducted into it at selected posts of Training and at the level of policy making. Further it needs to be equipped with better equipments, in consonance with suggestions from Intelligence agencies.
Well said Rohit. People forget that everyone does best in what they are trained to. When it comes to guarding the borders the BSF knows best. Army may have more firepower and is equipped to take on invading forces but it lacks the intelligence and expertise of the BSF in guarding borders from smugglers and terrorists. I agree BSF needs to be commanded by its cadre officers
Defending the indefensible after 30 odd brazen infiltration attempts and later carnage in the rear. Not acceptable.
All Armed forces of union need to be placed under single command structure. These BGFs can not be allowed to cook thier own broth at the cost of National security. Can BGFs fight thier wars at thier own sweet will. Govt needs to place these BGFs under CDS for synegy and coordination.
The CDS is too busy showering rose petals on corona warriors and launching Chinese-origin cars to also take the BFS under his wing. He might be better advised instead to reflect why we were caught with our proverbial trousers down by the PLA a second time in history; and whether he proposes to get them off our territory. Fulminating against Pakistan is all too easy … the real threat is from the other direction.
The culture of our Army, unfortunately, is highly parochial and turf-minded. Not just toward the police and paramilitary forces, but also towards the air force. The army brass loses no opportunity to make a case for showing that they ought to be the top dogs, never mind common sense and logic. It is particularly galling to see such an attitude at this time, when the Indian army was caught totally by surprise by the PLA in Ladakh, leading to the loss of hundreds of square miles of territory and the current stalemate which is costing us the lives of soldiers and thousands of crores of rupees of expenditure. Sadly, however, the army is a ‘holy cow’ and has gotten used to the adulation of the masses, which makes its leadership blind to their own shortcomings. Frankly, it is pathetic to see generals walking timidly behind politicians these days as the latter engage in PR stunts with army units as the backdrop.
There is a reason why most countries do not place their armies directly on the border in peacetime, and have a separate chain of command for the border guards: borders need policing to check criminal activity and terrorism based on intelligence, with cooperation from the local populace and care for civil law; putting soldiers trained to shoot first and ask questions later leads to all sorts of abuses, as has been the case in Kashmir and the North East for decades. Frankly, successful cases in India where terrorism was defeated – such as in Punjab in the 1990s – are classic examples of the army operating under command of the local police. At that time we had exemplary police leaders like KPS Gill and sensible army leaders like Gen. Sundarji. The present lot are of the ilk of V K Singh, bogged down in petty squabbling.
BSF under IPS command is a disaster, they don’t have temperament to handle borders nor are they hands on! I would suggest it has its own cadre but under MOD so that they work for the same objective
India does not need this kind of petty squabble about the turf, att a critical time when India is facing security threats both external from two hostile countries, and internal threats from sundry insurgents. This kind of turf dispute can be highly damaging to the country’s security. When something seriously goes wrong, everyone from PM to chaprasi takes security seriously and blames intelligence agencies for intelligence failure. Soon these lessons are forgotten and the turf squabbles rear their ugly heads. It is this kind of internicine quarrel which has helped our enemies dominate our country for one thousand years in the past.