Indian Intelligence Agencies Conference

[Guest guest]

Indian Intelligence Agencies Conference

October 26, 2004

It was a workshop with a difference.

 

On October 20, India's top national security experts put their heads

together to discuss national security management and learn from the

recent intelligence failures of the United States of America, United

Kingdom and Russia.

 

B Raman, a security expert and rediff.com columnist, had organized

this workshop, which witnessed two hours of lively discussions on

five papers -- two on the Indian intelligence scenario and three on

the lessons from the experience of the USA, UK and Russia.

 

The audience comprised six retired directors and two retired

additional directors of the Intelligence Bureau (including the

recently forcibly retired K P Singh), three retired chiefs and four

other retired senior officers of the Research and Analysis Wing,

including Vikram Sud, A K Verma and Girish Chandra 'Gary' Saxena,

three retired chiefs of the Aviation Research Centre, four retired

chairmen of the Joint Intelligence Committee, one retired director-

general of Military Intelligence, three ex-ambassadors, a retired

counter-terrorism expert of the army, a retired air marshal of the

Indian Air Force and half-a-dozen journalists.

 

The most significant aspect of the conclave was that it was held at

all. K Subrahmanyam, the doyen of the strategic analysts' community,

said such a summit of retired intelligence officers and the users of

their intelligence would have been unthinkable in the past.

 

He also drew attention to the fact that deliberately or unknowingly,

the conclave coincided with the 42nd anniversary of China's attack

on India, which he described as the result of India's first major

intelligence failure.

 

The main speakers were former national security advisor Brajesh

Mishra, once the most powerful man after then prime minister Atal

Behari Vajpayee, and K Subrahmanyam.

 

In his keynote address, Brajesh Mishra revealed how the chiefs of

the IB and RAW used to keep each other in the dark about the

intelligence that they were passing on to him. Besides, various

agencies hid their shortcomings too.

 

He said these agencies must co-ordinate their efforts. He emphasized

on the importance of human intelligence over technical intelligence.

 

He also touched upon the touchy issue of the intelligence community

providing information to suit the government of the day.

 

K Subrahmanyam was highly critical of the lack of seriousness in the

political class to national security management. He cited the

example of how the National Democratic Alliance government had set

up the National Security Council with great fanfare in 1998 but

never convened it thereafter.

 

He pointed out that our parliamentarians have not found the time to

discuss the report of the Kargil Review Committee, which he headed,

even five years after it submitted its report.

 

Kargil Review Committee report

Parliament has also failed to discuss the reports of the four task

forces set up by the NDA government to recommend steps to revamp the

intelligence agencies, internal security, border management and

defence management.

 

He described the NDA government's decision to replace the Joint

Intelligence Committee with a NSC secretariat as a retrograde step,

which has damaged the quality of the analysis of even the available

intelligence.

 

The present United Progressive Alliance government, he said, is

dealing with national security management in the same ad hoc manner

as the NDA government.

 

One of the speakers pointed out that the discussions, which were

meant to be a brainstorming exercise, tended to become

autobiographical with some speaking on their tenures and/or

accomplishments. There was hardly any self-criticism.

 

But one of the participants stunned the sober audience by describing

one of the Indian intelligence agencies as 'moth-eaten British

legacy'.

 

National Security: The Domestic Challenge

There were differences amongst the gathering on whether India needs

to draw any lessons from the experience of the USA, UK and Russia.

 

The practice in the USA and the UK of the intelligence chiefs

submitting reports to suit the decisions already taken by their

political masters came in for strong criticism. Strangely, it was

made out as if such instances of intelligence chiefs dancing to the

tunes of their political masters were more an exception than the

rule in India.

 

The organisers propose to submit a report on the salient points of

the discussions to the policy-makers in the government and to

publish the proceedings of the workshop in an edited form for the

benefit of the public.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/oct/26sheela.htm

--- End forwarded message ---