In the realm of national security strategy, one concept looms large – strategic depth. This term encapsulates a fundamental aspect of a country’s security posture, revolving around the spatial dimension between the front lines, often referred to as the Tactical Battle Area (TBA), and the base from which the military derives its strength, encompassing manpower, equipment, and resources.
The expanse that lies between these two critical points, through which vital roads and railroads traverse, forming the lifelines of logistics and communications, is known as the Communications Zone or Comn Z. This zone plays a pivotal role in supporting troops in the TBA, including population centers and critical infrastructure. Ultimately, the depth of this zone and the strategic objectives it encompasses can determine whether a nation can adopt a strategy of ‘trading space for time’ when confronted with adverse circumstances.
India, with its vast landmass, possesses a unique advantage in terms of strategic depth. Its core regions are dotted with industrial hubs, major cities, and extensive road and rail networks that span the entire country. Yet, many of these lucrative targets find themselves perilously close to or within the TBA, making them vulnerable to being overrun during the initial stages of an enemy offensive. Consequently, India must carefully calibrate its strategic posture, especially in the context of potential adversaries like China to the North and Pakistan to the West. Moreover, the operational strategy employed in various border sectors will vary based on factors such as terrain, the strategic significance of the region, and the political implications of potential losses.
On the Western Front, India may entertain the option of trading space for time in the desert sector, allowing an enemy offensive to dissipate due to the region’s inherent lack of vital natural resources, particularly water. However, this approach might not be applicable further North. In regions housing major population centers of political and religious significance, such as Amritsar, located just over 30 kilometers from the international border and well within the range of enemy long-range artillery, a resolute defense becomes imperative. The fall of such a city would inflict irreparable damage to India’s reputation, both domestically and internationally. Consequently, military strategies in desert and plain sectors differ significantly.
To the North, India shares a lengthy border of over 3,000 kilometers with Tibet, which China occupied in the 1950s. In this context, defense strategies along the Northern, Central, and Eastern sectors must be tailored to the unique challenges and circumstances of each region. Since the Galwan clash in 2020, both the People’s Liberation Army and the Indian Army have fortified their positions, with neither side willing to yield ground. In the Central Sector, adjacent to Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, lie areas of great religious importance that demand robust and unwavering defense from the outset. A similar principle applies to the Sikkim and Tawang areas in the Eastern sector. If the strategy of trading space for time is to be contemplated at all, it might find applicability in the other valleys of Eastern Arunachal Pradesh. However, caution is paramount, as China claims this area as part of South Tibet, a stance reinforced by their official map published as recently as August 28, 2023.
In essence, while India boasts the luxury of vast territorial expanse, its strategic depth is somewhat limited by pressing domestic imperatives. Consequently, India must adopt forward deployment as a near-universal approach to deter preemptive surprise attacks effectively. Despite technological advancements, a strong ground presence remains the primary means to achieve this crucial security goal.
News Mania Desk / Agnibeena Ghosh 5th September 2023
