India’s defence is based on triad which is land, air and sea. The weakest link is the sea power. Our defence expenditure is less than 2.5 per cent of the GDP, one of the lowest for any major country and well below that of some of our neighbors. While the army and air force have been getting their due share within the allocated resources, the navy is the most neglected wing of the three services. A modest increase in the budget for the navy is not asking for too much even within the constraints of fiscal austerity.

India’s Naval Chief, Admiral Suresh Mehta, has found this objectionable but there has been no squeak of protest from our political class-not from the purported economists running our government, nor from the nationalists running the opposition, nor from the communists who keep saluting every year at Lenin’s statute. There has not even been any serious debate in this country on the issue of aircraft carriers versus submarines that all other major countries have. In every other country, including the USA, the submarine has won the debate and the aircraft-carrier has lost. Submarines are relatively cheap, lethal and silent; aircraft-carriers are expensive sitting ducks.

India’s economic zones in the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea are under constant threat. In case of a hostility breaking out with Pakistan, our on-sea installation for crude oil production will face destruction causing not only immense economic loss, but ecological devastation of great magnitude. Currently the debate centers on the under-sea acquisition-like submarines, and, on-surface acquisitions like frigates and aircraft carriers. In more than one sense, the debate is lopsided. We really need is an even matched combination-under-sea and on-surface multiplier capabilities for defensive and offensive jobs.

Over the last 10-years, our navy except for a few submarines has not acquired any new kind of vessel. Some of the older ships have become unserviceable. This has reduced the effective strength of our underwater fleet. We are going for a soft option acquisition-an off-the-shelf-purchase rather than for indigenous construction. This may be unavoidable in the short-run, but what we need is self-reliance for building ships of all varieties.

In the present charged geopolitical scenario in South As there is no denying that the Indian navy has a significant role to play along with the army and air force? Bui this should be clearly defined keeping in mind the national objectives. An aircraft carrier acts as a floating airstrip away from the mainland in situations where it is not possible to provide air cover from the land. Thus, it has an attack role in waters far away from the mainland. However, India has always pursued a defensive policy and has no intention in normal circumstances of fighting an enemy in its territory or entering the territorial limits of its waters. Even if that were so, all our airfields are so located that we are in a position to provide adequate air cover to our troops and ships around our borders. To this, if we add our land and sea-based missile capacity, then there is no area left on land or sea where we cannot be effective. The Indian navy certainly needs more strength of guided missile vessels, long-range ocean-surveillance aircraft, helicopters, and attack and hunter-killer submarines, preferably nuclear.