Indian Grey Zone Aggression and Strategy of Conflict Prosecution

Introduction

Indian Army Chief General Manoj Pande has recently given public speeches about global implications of China’s rise, India’s territorial capabilities and technological requirements, and the new generation warfare. These almost identical talking points were apparently meant to influence India’s adversaries and allies alike – to deter the former and co-opt the latter. China, use of emerging disruptive technologies, and prosecuting conflict in grey zone warfare were the primary features of the recent spate of strategic communication. What does Indian eagerness to wage war in grey zone imply?

China Focus

Nowadays, India projects China as its primary adversary and Pakistan as a secondary threat. Although the bulk of Indian military posture is arrayed against Pakistan, using China as a bogey serves two major ends. One, to measure up to the title of net security provider in the Indian Ocean region that the US and extended NATO have given to New Delhi. Two, there is an element of prestige and status attached to picking up fight with the rising superpower.

General Pande gave a credible threat, “(We need) ways to keep enemies (China and Pakistan) in a state of constant reaction.…” Taking a leaf from the history of international politics, this threat may lead to a scenario where both China and Pakistan see India as a common foe and work towards proactively dealing with New Delhi. It is because, during a crisis situation, if either Pakistan or China attempt to singlehandedly respond to India, the latter may play in the gap created by lack of synergy between the Iron Brothers.

Overtime, India has developed a sense of exceptionalism and entitlement on the premise that the West needs it to contain China. General Pande recently used the phrase, “…[India’s] rightful place in global nuclear order….” India expects Western support in its rise at the least possible cost. Its rhetoric towards China and reality of grey zone warfare were visible in 2020-21 conflict over the disputed Galwan Valley. New Delhi was cautious not to escalate the conflict. Likewise, till 2018-19 China was a bigger Indian trade partner than the US.

Disruptive Technologies

Indian Army intends to enhance its operational preparedness and increase efficiency towards becoming a more modern, agile, adaptive, and technology enabled future ready force. To achieve that it plans force optimization and restructuring, transitioning from manpower intensive army to a battle worthy and technology driven one. Likewise, it seeks modernization and technology inclusion for improving jointness and integration among the three services.

It is normal for the militaries to absorb the cutting-edge technologies, gain competitive strategic advantage over their adversaries and remain ready to conduct operations and achieve victory. Currently, New Delhi has clear lead here with respect to Pakistan. Although India has been in China’s rearview mirror, the situation could change soon, given the unfettered access India enjoys not only to Western but also Russian technology and knowledge. Conversely, Pakistan faces an aggressive denial regime, and its economic constraints remain a big hurdle in acquiring technology and knowledge even from willing partners.

China is notably the main source of military technology to Pakistan but there is no evidence that Beijing is sharing or is willing to share the crown jewels of its disruptive technologies and associated knowledgebase. Since Pakistan is seen as China’s main ally, the Western sources are drying up and may completely shut soon. The West may even use economic coercion to deter Pakistan from acquiring Chinese and other technologies.

The only practical option to address this quandary in the near future may be to expedite shift from Western orbit to Chinese and later other reliable sources. Technological cooperation with China will be as integrated as the strategic like-mindedness and political alignment. If Pakistan’s squares its domestic political turmoil and economic situation improves, Russia could be another major source besides countries like Türkiye.

As the new generation of combat is technology driven, maintaining balance against India’s asymmetric rise should be the biggest imperative for both China and Pakistan. It is a domain that the two can ill-afford leave uncontested.

Conflict Prosecution in Grey Zone

Although General Pande frames India’s grey zone warfare as a preventive strategy and as means to create conditions for unhindered economic and social growth, it is offensive and all-pervasive in nature. He said, “For nuclear domain, the war has spanned the entire spectrum of conflict, with grey zone aggression factored in as an increasingly preferred strategy of conflict prosecution.”

Among the key features of grey zone aggression strategy of conflict prosecution is to give up two-decade old credible minimum deterrence policy and resort to full spectrum war. General Pande espoused the need to “proactively build credible deterrence” since he was Vice Chief of Army Staff. As the Indian Chief, he echoed, “The capabilities [we] thus arrive at ought to prevent war by presenting a credible deterrence.…” Avoiding use of “minimum” signals a major policy shift. It is strange that instead of the Prime Minister Office, the COAS made such statement. This also hints at possible changes in nuclear command and control protocols.

New Delhi is in a unilateral nuclear arms race in South Asia. In 2021, India ranked the third largest defense spender in the world, with military expenditure peaking at USD 76.6 billion. It has one of the largest and most versatile air, sea, and land-based nuclear delivery platforms. Likewise, according to some estimates, it has the third largest stockpile of fissile material in the world.

To wage the conventional conflict, Indian establishment seeks self-sufficiency in defense technologies and investments in research and development. General Pande also indicated preparation for full spectrum of conflict, which is a step-up from India’s erstwhile reliance on full spectrum deterrence because latter is defensive and former is offensive in nature.

Indian Army has always been configured and trained to operate across full spectrum of conflict. Besides emphasis on technology-driven conflicts, India has been seeking to expand the space of conflict in all dimensions, including for fighting a limited war under nuclear overhang.

The spectrum of conflict is not limited to hard power. As General Pande said, “To win a war of stories, we also need to have the right skills and strategies in place.…” New Delhi has developed an edge in information warfare. In 2020, European DisinfoLab unearthed Ani and Srivatsa Group’s state-run vast propaganda network that included resurrecting a dead professor and numerous defunct organizations – at least 750 fake media outlets in a vast 15-year global disinformation campaign. As early as 2012, India had launched 500,000 strong cyber warriors to bolster its e-defense.

Last but not the least, India has been funding terror outfits for proxy wars against Pakistan. Islamabad has been often providing proofs of Indian involvement and even senior Western leadership has at times echoed Pakistan’s laments. However, this falls on deaf ears in countries that are politically aligned with India.

Conclusion

By engaging in terrorism and claiming to be its victim, Indian establishment has created and used favorable environment to play the bogeys of terrorism and twin-front threat to abrogate “minimalism” in its doctrine and expanding the spectrum of conflict beyond traditional domains. India presents a pulsating challenge to the region and beyond. If not possible through other means and actors, China and Pakistan must jointly deal with this threat among other factors, through cooperation in emerging technologies and create integration across the spectrum of contemporary grey zone warfare.