Editorial 1 : To Win Without Fighting
Context: It’s time India framed a national security doctrine.
Introduction: India needs a comprehensive national security doctrine to address evolving threats, enhance deterrence, and expand its sphere of influence.
Necessity of a Doctrinal Approach
- Historical Context
- India has historically relied on operational military tactics, winning 3 wars with Pakistan but lacks a cohesive strategy to prevent conflicts.
- Nuclear deterrence (articulated in the 2003 Nuclear Doctrine) has failed to stop aggression from nuclear-armed neighbours (China, Pakistan) or curb terrorism.
- Strategic Limitations
- Current policies focus on reactive defence rather than proactive deterrence.
- Smaller neighbours (e.g. Nepal, Sri Lanka) increasingly align with adversaries due to India’s lack of a clear strategic vision.
Lessons from China’s Strategic Doctrine
- China’s military doctrine, influenced by Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, prioritizes subduing the enemy without fighting.
- Example: No major wars since 1979, yet it has expanded influence through diplomacy, economic power, and strategic alliances.
- Contrast with India: India’s reactive posture allows adversaries to dictate terms (e.g. border incursions by China, cross-border terrorism by Pakistan).
Limitation of India’s Policy-Making
- Inconsistent Philosophical Foundations
- Romanticism vs. Pragmatism
- No First Use (NFU) nuclear policy reflects India’s self-image as a peaceful nation but risks being perceived as passive.
- It contrasts with Krishna’s Mahabharata philosophy i.e. resolved to wage war to establish dharma (righteous order).
- Policy Paralysis: Debates over revising NFU highlight India’s reluctance to align doctrine with ground realities.
- Fragmented Security Approach
- Overemphasis on military solutions while neglecting diplomacy, soft power, and socio-political tools.
- Example: Emperor Ashoka used Buddhist missionaries to create a ring of security around his empire.
- Chanakya’s Mandala Theory: Neighbours are natural enemies, but security depends on influencing the farthest borders through political and diplomatic engagement.
Way Forward: Recommendations for a Doctrinal Framework
- Core Principles
- Preventive Deterrence: Shift from winning wars to avoiding conflicts through credible deterrence (e.g. unacceptable damage doctrine for nuclear and terror threats).
- Multi-Dimensional Security: Integrate military, diplomatic, cultural, and economic tools (e.g. leveraging India’s soft power in neighbouring regions).
- Flexibility and Adaptability: Doctrine should provide guiding principles, not rigid rules, allowing strategies to evolve with geopolitical shifts.
- End Goals
- Strategic Autonomy: Avoid re-hyphenation with Pakistan or other rogue powers in global narratives.
- Sphere of Influence: Expand regional leadership through trust-building and proactive engagement (e.g. countering China’s Belt and Road Initiative).
Conclusion: A national security doctrine would enable India to deter aggression through clarity of intent and capability, project strategic consistency to adversaries and allies and move beyond romantic ideals to pragmatic, multi-domain solutions. Without such a framework, India risks remaining reactive, allowing adversaries to exploit its fragmented approach.