When Prime Minister Narendra Modi came away from his first Combined Commanders Conference in 2014, it is common knowledge within the strategic establishment that he was disappointed with the vision placed before him by the combined cohort of tri-service military commanders. His direction to them was to fast-track reform within the armed forces with an emphasis on improving operational effectiveness by enhancing synergy and concentrating on cutting flab.

Obstacles to transformation

To be fair to the armed forces’ leadership, much effort has gone in to achieve these objectives. However, the results have not been transformational — the first is the lop-sided reform of the Higher Defence Organisation, which places the onus solely on the armed forces to reform, rather than restructuring the entire national security architecture through a top-down approach. The second is the lack of consensus among the three services over integration in the absence of meaningful higher direction. The third is the snail’s pace at which senior military leadership has upgraded and expressed itself cogently in the intellectual domain to draw the attention of the political leadership to the complexities of integration and transformation.

At the heart of the post-colonial military legacy left behind by the British was a strong anti-intellectual flavour, which suggested that tradition, ethos, spit and polish, and tactical acumen were sufficient to sustain and develop a modern military. It was almost four decades before General K. Sundarji attempted an intellectual transformation in the Indian Army in the late 1980s, reverberations of which were felt in the other two services too. His intellectual capacity allowed him to engage meaningfully with the apex strategic and political leadership on issues as wide-ranging as nuclear strategy and civil-military relations. Air Commodore Jasjit Singh emerged as the intellectual flag-bearer of air power in the 1990s, playing an important role in raising the air power consciousness within the larger strategic and political establishment. He was a prolific writer and spoke fearlessly on both air power and nuclear strategy. Rear Admiral Raja Menon from the Indian Navy advocated for sea power and raised the maritime consciousness within the nation. This trio teamed up with K. Subrahmanyam as the flag-bearers of intellectual advocacy in the realm of military affairs.

Over the last two decades, despite the quantum jump in the number of PhDs acquired by senior military officers, there has been an intellectual vacuum within the top echelons of India’s military leadership for three reasons. The first is the ‘upward mobility trap’ that snares senior military leaders at the two-star rank and above into an operational cocoon and penalises dissenting professional and intellectual views in an environment where ‘company policy and being politically correct’ is important. Speaking truth to power can only come about with serious intellectual depth.

The second is in the realm of personal development wherein there is a significant whole-of-government knowledge deficit that comes from the inability to put in serious intellectual work (reading and writing) side-by-side with a taxing senior operational assignment. All the great generals from history, from B.L. Montgomery, E. Rommel, K.S. Thimayya and K. Sundarji spent hours of solitude reflecting and writing on various dimensions of soldiering, strategy and statecraft. In today’s complex multi-dimensional security environment, intellectual reflection within the larger security ecosystem draws respect from other stakeholders. When was the last time a paper proposing a disruptive but doable military idea, authored by a colonel, brigadier, or general, found its way to the top echelons of the country’s national security leadership?

The third is a need for elements of the Higher Defence Organisation including the Ministry of Defence and the political establishment to foster a more enabling intellectual environment within the armed forces that facilitates professional debate, innovation and accelerated reform. Maybe the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence can reflect on this issue. India’s armed forces are highly professional and understand that they are instruments of the state with a clear constitutional mandate. Giving them greater intellectual bandwidth and freedom will not come with any downside risk.

Unlocking existing potential

On a positive note, the Professional Military Education (PME) system within India’s armed forces is on a solid footing though there is scope for greater focus on the complexities of a whole-of-government approach towards national security. The existing PME flow, with a little bit of innovation and greater academic rigour, offers much potential for conversion into solid senior-leadership intellectual potential. The quality of writing and the ability to generate ideas in India’s war colleges is good and reflects the enthusiasm of youth and hope.

A sure-shot way of enabling transformation within India’s armed forces in the current geopolitical environment is through a vibrant intellectual route. If the government can accelerate and enable economic reform, it can do the same with military reform. The challenge will be to enhance intellectual productivity in an elephant-paced, conservative and hierarchical armed forces. It is the senior leadership that must show the way.

Arjun Subramaniam is a retired Air Vice Marshal. The views expressed are personal

Published - August 13, 2026 12:08 am IST