Abstract
In a richly detailed book that brings a much-needed and fresh perspective to the subject of Indian civil–military relations, Anit Mukherjee’s The Absent Dialogue makes a vital contribution in explaining the inherently dysfunctional nature of Indian civil–military relations. At the root of this dysfunction is what the author refers to as “the absent dialogue” which gives rise to conditions ultimately detrimental to military effectiveness. Mukherjee argues that patterns of democratic civil–military relations are shaped by three factors—significant military autonomy, a lack of civilian expertise, and strong bureaucratic control. Fundamental to the last is institutional design, the Ministry of Defense’s (MoD) interaction with the three services. In addition, Mukherjee examines five variables associated with military effectiveness—weapons procurement, jointness, professional military education (PME), officer promotion policies, and defense planning. In making the central argument of the book, the author draws on theoretical insights from Samuel Huntington and Eliot Cohen.
Chapter 2 examines the role of five war-time commanders and the, often, tumultuous relationship they shared with India’s political leaders whose approach to the military was driven by domestic imperatives and individual personality styles that often betrayed a lack of communication. This issue was especially visible during Nehru’s time, and was handled better under Indira Gandhi, but accelerated again during the Vajpayee years. Chapter 3 examines the weapons procurement process in detail and observes how a combination of military autonomy and absence of civilian expertise with an excessive reliance on self-sufficiency has stunted India’s defense procurement process. Chapter 4 focuses on jointness as a measure of military effectiveness. Here, Mukherjee argues that absence of civilian intervention has only intensified inter-service rivalries. The chapter offers a rich description of jointness in India’s external wars with Pakistan and China and its expeditionary counterinsurgency operations against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka. As each service emphasizes its own operational and organizational priorities over any concept of joint operations, this lack of coordination creates problems with interoperability. Lack of civilian expertise is again the source of the problem here as bureaucrats in the MoD serve on a rotational basis. The author further argues that it also serves as an example of weak civilian control as the three services have resisted efforts at jointness and civilians do not wish to intervene in fear of electoral consequences. Chapter 5 offers an excellent analysis on a neglected subject—PME. The military exercises considerable autonomy in this role to its own detriment. Curricula development shaped by the military combined with very few civilian instructors produces a military education system that reads more like a training manual rather than a sophistical pedagogical exercise in building an expansive knowledge base of critical theories. Further, as the military does not declassify its files, it makes any study of military history next to impossible. Bureaucratic control plays a key role here too. Mukherjee argues partnership and civilian intervention is crucial to enhance PME. Chapter 6 investigates military effectiveness as a function of promotion policies. Promotion policies in India are a military affair and civilians have little to do with the process. Chapter 7 elaborates on defense planning, highlighting the friction between various civilian agencies tasked with these functions, chiefly, the MoD and the Ministry of Finance. Civilians are unable to provide strategic guidance to inform military capability and plans. While new organizations like the Defense Acquisition Council, the Defense Procurement Board, and the IDS have made planning more systematic, some of the recommendations of the 2012 Naresh Chandra Committee Report are yet to be implemented fully. Chapter 8 provides a neat overview of civil military relations in contemporary India outlining the main controversies since 2004 and the slow pace of defense reforms. Mukherjee argues that the military has lost faith in the bureaucracy’s role as an honest interlocutor. Chapter 9 summarizes the main arguments of the book and provides reflections on future research.
The Absent Dialogue makes an outstanding contribution to the existing literature on Indian civil–military relations on an understudied subject. The book is rigorously researched using primary documents, secondary data, and interviews with senior military officials and civilian leaders. It is rich in context and detail and provides a superb analysis of historical cases. The lack of civilian and bureaucratic expertise is the predominant theme of the book and is central to understanding the tension in Indian civil–military relations. It is also perhaps one of the causes that have led to greater politicization of the military in recent years with some serving members in the military taking stronger political positions in public than others. This politicization is deeply problematic for civilian control. Some military officials are also relinquishing military expertise and following the nationalist government’s policy on matters because of an ideological alignment of issues. This, too, is a dangerous trend. Another common theme in Indian civil–military relations is the lack of attention to institutional reform by the country’s political leadership, irrespective of party or ideology. While Mukherjee points to an “absent dialogue” in civil–military relations, the problem may not be so much about an absent dialogue but rather inconsistencies in communication between the military and civilians. Civilians often do communicate with the military, but the mechanisms are rather poor; at times, much of the dialogue happens after a crisis rather than before. While the author is correct that informed civilian intervention is key, the absence of timely institutional reform makes such intervention harder, leaving the military with greater autonomy. The relationship between military autonomy (the degree to which it is prevalent) and military effectiveness is not all that clearly threaded in the book. The author seems to suggest that both—too much military autonomy in the absence of adequate civilian intervention—and a lack of civilian expertise compromise military effectiveness. Despite a few minor inconsistencies, the book is an absolute must-read for scholars and practitioners on the subject.
