Efficiency-sizing the Armed Forces-III
(This is the THIRD in a series of articles on the Defence Budget).
The basic fighting unit that makes up a soldier is composed of a human being, his weapon and his equipment. The modern environment of warfare makes improvement in the quality of the weapon and equipment imperative in keeping pace with the development of the human being as an effective fighting machine. Despite the overwhelming numbers that it used to good effect in “human wave” assaults in the Korean War, the Chinese Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) realized the great disadvantage of lack of superior infantry weapons (among other weaknesses) in its short war with Vietnam, pragmatically it set about rectifying this anomaly.
Our major disadvantage is the obsolescence of the basic weapon of our fighting soldier. In 1965, the .30 Calibre US M-1 and the Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) Light Machine Gun (LMG) did not serve us as well as did the Lee Enfield .303 Rifle and the British LMG before them. In 1965 units were already changing over to the locally manufactured Rifle G3 and the MG 1A2, both excellent 7.62 calibre weapons. The weapon that really commanded attention in the post-1965 period (and still does) is the Chinese 7.62 AK-47 (better known as the Kalashnikov), first choice weapon of guerrillas and terrorists all over the world. In Vietnam, US soldiers were known to throwaway the M-1 successor M-16 (5.56 Calibre) rifle for the AK-47 captured from the Viet Cong. Even in our Army the Chinese Sub Machine Gun (SMG) as the AK-47 is universally known, is preferred to other weapons. During the 1971 war, officers in good units carried the Rifle G3, or where available the SMG, in preference to the pistol or the revolver which was more useful for throwing at rather than shooting at the enemy. Armed Forces across the world have shifted over or are shifting over to a more modern smaller calibre weapon. This development is not an isolated event, it has been a gradual process from the time muzzle/single loaders (muskets) were made obsolete in favour of a bolt action rifle, in our case the Lee Enfield .303 rifle with a magazine. Thereafter to increase firepower, an automatic self-loading rifle (M-1) was developed to save time from manual loading. Since a sub-machine gun was not effective over larger distances and combat situations called for short distances in urban fighting, a natural progression was the assault rifle (G-3). To meet the requirement for increased firepower a soldier should be able to carry more ammunition with him, the weight of the rifle and ammunition has to be reduced drastically, the development of calibre reduction resulted in automatic rifles like M-16, AR-18, FN-CAL, G-41, Beretta, SAR-80, AK-74 and the Steyr-AUG (Army Universal Gun). The increased use of transport eg APCs, Jeeps, Helicopters, etc called for a weapon with shorter barrel and foldable butt, so weapons like HK-33, G-41, FNC, Steyr AUG etc were developed. For a country like Pakistan the major requirement is universality and ease of logistics. The standardization of all small arms equipment from SMG to rifle to Light Machine Gun to Heavy Machine Gun for multi-purposes, easy maintenance and 100% interchangeability of parts for ease of logistics pointed to the Bullpup design. Among the positive factors despite the short barrel were all the advantages of a long barrel, easy handling, compactness, quick action, shortness as well as guarding against rusting, wear and tear because of its special material. The only answer for the Pakistan Army in an elaborate “shoot-out” in 1989-90 between three short-listed weapons was the Steyr AUG. However, Heckler and Koch rules the roost in the Pakistan Ordnance Factories (POF) and their clout with the powers-that-be ensured that the results were not turned into practical reality and while the rest of the world has turned to modernizing, POF is churning out Rifle G3s so that someone should keep on getting royalty. While all the armies (including India) are modernizing, for the near future our rifle section has the Rifle G3 and MG-1A2, the platoon and the company the Rifle G-3, MG-1A2 and Heavy MG-1A2 (tripod-mounted), two different types of ammunition. If on the contrary, we had something like the AUG, there would be one type of ammunition throughout the infantry battalion, double the firepower which can presently be man-carried and with easy interchangeability of parts, etc. While changeover will cost money in the short run, indigenous production will ensure that in the long run we would make up in recurring expenses, unlike the rest of the armies entering the 21st century, we are in a time-freeze that will cause us great misery in any future war. Our present policy is penny-wise, pound foolish in all respects.
Infantry warfare is constantly changing shape, especially as we have seen in Bosnia but the sniper is as important as in World War I. Entire front lines have been held hostage to the hidden sniper. Some of our battlefields will always be over fixed lines, particularly in the mountains and along the Sialkot and Lahore fronts. To gain ascendancy over the battlefields, infantry units must have many more snipers constantly engaging the enemy. The fear of being taken out by a hidden hand will make the enemy immobile, it will take a particular toll among the younger leadership because they do have to show themselves, that essential unit in the leadership chain will be decimated at very little cost to ourselves. Our aim should be to provide at least one sniper rifle in each infantry section.
While one could understand the British employing para-military forces in the tribal areas and to patrol international borders, we are still persisting with the same formula without catering for cost efficiency. The Frontier Corps in the two Western Provinces and the Rangers in the two Eastern Provinces constitute approximately four plus divisions of light infantry ie. without the infantry divisions usual complement of artillery, armour, engineer, etc. During wartime these units are to be used as regular infantry but while they have lot of practical training in patrolling, internal security, anti-smuggling operations, etc the para-military soldiers are not really geared to fight army-type operations during a full-fledged war. As such their employment fulfils only a paper purpose, no real effective value except filling gaps. At the same time, discipline, morale, efficiency, etc are not at the level of regular troops despite their being as brave and hardy or even more. The correct way would be for regular units to be rotated for FC and Ranger Duties on an annual basis for para-military operations, taking only their light arms with them, leaving behind heavy weapons, transport and equipment in a fixed depot from where they can draw upon. The Frontier Corps and Rangers only have their HQ complements, for mobility should having Hi-Lux type vehicles so that they can be used as motorized infantry on mobilization for war. Some major advantages of such a plan should it come to fruition would be that though the units would be seconded to civil power viz (1) the short period in the para-military role would not allow familiarity leading to possible corruption, etc (2) the units would be able to fight a war as well as other comparable other units, ie an addition of almost 36-40 fully equipped, fully trained motorized infantry battalions for possible use with the proposed light armoured divisions and (3) discipline would be under the Pakistan Army Act (PAA) and personnel would get commensurate benefits as do regular troops.
There are many other aspects of the Army that can be economized upon but they should not be discussed in the print media especially pertaining to technical matters and logistics. No idea is perfect but a basket of imperfect ideas can provide the logic behind practical reality. The Army’s planners must come to terms with ground realities as they enter the 21st century.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment