 Welcome to NewsClick. Today we have with us the Lieutenant General Prakash Katoch who retired as commander of the Special Forces of the Indian Army. He is also a prolific writer and he has been writing not just on military affairs but also other issues that concern the country. Welcome to NewsClick sir. Thank you. I would like to begin by asking you something that Chief of the Army Staff, General Bipin Rawat said recently at one of the meetings where he talked about and introduced the subject matter of hybrid warfare. And I quote, hybrid warfare he said is a form of war fighting which is all-encompassing rather than focusing on destroying an enemy's military capability. It focuses on population and infra as the center of gravity. It covers the full spectrum of warfare by combining the vigor, lethality of conventional warfare with fanatical fervor of irregular warfare and untapped spectrum of technology for cyber and info warfare. It also entails creating acts of criminal disorder, law and order issues and public disorder in the target country during peace. It embodies the age-old saying all is fair in war, unquote. Sir, can you explain to a normal person what this means? When he says that the focus, the center of gravity is not just military capability of the enemy but it focuses on population and infra. I agree 100% with what General Rawat has said. In fact, we have been fighting hybrid war for the past 20 years, even in the case of Pakistan or with China. Conventional war is only one part of hybrid warfare whereas the understanding generally in India is that war means conventional war. So, any problems, whether we have it? So, is hybrid warfare what is also called counterinsurgency operations? Not exactly. You see, hybrid warfare. So, what distinguishes hybrid warfare from counterinsurgency? See, we have conventional warfare, we have sub-conventional warfare which is below the level of the conventional warfare. Counterinsurgency and counterterrorism will be part of the sub-conventional warfare in which you have also the employment of irregular forces, which Pakistan has been doing against us. Now, in order to fight that, it can't be if it is against the nation, the hybrid warfare is against the nation, not against the military. So, it is not the military alone that can fight hybrid warfare, it has to be at the national level. But, say, if there is a hybrid war in, say, domains of cyber warfare, electromagnetic and space, the military doesn't have any say here. It has to be done at the national level. So, when you say that the focus shifts to the center of gravity shifts to population in India and not the military capabilities. No, it includes both. The center of gravity will remain the population, but the application of military power also is as important. Because in present-day warfare, what is happening is that conventional wars are receding. They are not... One of the commentators on hybrid warfare and army's land warfare doctrine has pointed out that if we move towards counter ops, coin ops, which is the new term that is being used. I would like you to explain that later for our viewers. That it would mean giving the air force the lead role. Lead role that the army, because it would be a shift away from conventional to coin ops, counter insurgency operations. And where air power would play a critical role. And in other words, the lead role would have to be provided to the air force. Whereas the army chief is on record saying that the army would still be the leading force. How do you respond to this? Firstly, coin is not a new term. It's been an American term for a very, very long time. Coin. Coin. Yes. But so is hybrid warfare. Yeah. It is part of hybrid warfare. It's also an American... It's part of the sub-conventional segment. Okay. So what hybrid coin you're saying is all of it comes under the category of sub-conventional warfare? No. Other way round. Sub-conventional warfare and coin are part of hybrid warfare, as is conventional warfare. So hybrid is much more than... Yes. Hybrid warfare is at the highest level. It includes all this. But to say that in hybrid warfare, in say coin, you give the lead role to the air force, I think that's drastically wrong. You see, firstly in our own country, we are not using air force or artillery against insurgents. We are not the American army which is going to go and, you know, not bother about the collateral damage. That apart, wherever U.S. and NATO have been fighting, say, the Taliban or Al-Qaeda or the ISIS, has the air power been able to subdue these proxy forces? Not at all. So it's wrong to say that the lead role... You mean it's the ground forces that have always played the most critical role? Of course. Air force has a role. But it can't be the lead role can be given to and as far as we are concerned in our own country, we don't use the air force and the artillery, even the artillery. Not even attack helicopters. So where is the question of giving the lead role to... But we have done it in the past. Where? We have done it in Mizoram. Mizoram was different. Mizoram was one time when a brigade operation with air was utilized. And it was again because of the political hierarchy. Otherwise, that was not a class... Aizol was not a classical city which had to be bombed out. Let's return back to hybrid warfare. So you were explaining that hybrid warfare is... combines both the conventional and some conventional warfare. Plus, as the chief said, all forms of warfare. One of the important things he also refers to is the war of perception. Will you explain what war of perception means? It is the information warfare. It is that information warfare which you see today on social media which both the BJP and the Congress are playing. To attack your perception and lead your thinking in one particular manner. Unfortunately, we do this more in politics. But then he also said that the social media should be controlled. One would assume that if it's a perception warfare, then let there be battle of ideas. How can you control the social media? Has anybody been able to do it other than Chinese? So what does the army chief mean when he says that it should be controlled? I suppose he is... I suppose he is talking of the serving soldiers. That they should not get involved into this. But otherwise you cannot control it? So this is addressed to the troops themselves? Possibly. Possibly. He is talking of the troops under his command. That they should not get into this. But at the same time, when we are doing perception warfare or information warfare in J&K, from our side, even the military has to be involved. As I said, hybrid warfare is against a nation. One would say that the military always is involved because it comes out with its statements. It responds to any comment that is made against it. So it always intervenes and its word is carried by the media. So its version of the story is always carried by the media. So what more needs to be done beyond that? No, I haven't got a question. My point is that you said in the war of perception, its information, that is, you use the example of BJP Congress, each trying to dominate the social media coming out its version of the narrative to gain more ground and credence than the other persons. So it's a similar thing happening on the ground of, say, in J&K, as you said. Now the point I'm making is that the army has to ensure that its version of the events or its narrative comes out. That's already coming out. So what more needs to be done? No, it is you have to tackle, say in J&K, you have to tackle radicalization. So if you are... What do you mean by radicalization? Like the ideology, the Wahhabi ideology, the ISIS ideology. So there are hundreds of... Why should we be marking out J&K when we forget that in the rest of the country, let me complete. In the rest of the country, there is rabid radicalization by the Hindutva elements. And there is fear that this also probably permeates into the social media of the ex-service persons or the service persons and their families. And probably one of the reasons, one of the anxieties behind Armichi's statement is to guard against that. So given that when radicalization is taking place in the entire country, the Hindus are getting radicalized and you're saying Wahhabism is there. Why is that so special? It is as far as I'm concerned. Why should we ignore one and just focus on the... I am concentrating on areas where the army is involved in conflict. But Jammu is another... So you have hundreds of... Jammu-Kashmir is one state, right? Yes. So you have... Jammu has had the most unprecedented growth in Hindutva radicalization while J&K has been undergoing this trouble. Why is it that when the army talks about radicalization, it only talks about Wahhabism but never talks about Hindutva radicalization in Jammu and Kashmir, which is the area of your operation? Let me tell you a... You talked of Hindutva radicalization in Jammu. What about the Muslim radicalization in Jammu? No, I'm... No, no, I'm so... General Katoch... General Katoch, I... No, no, no, let me also talk. I'm not talking about that. No, the reason I'm pointing out is that we talk... There is enough talk about Islamic fundamentalism or radicalization in Jammu and Kashmir. There is... It's all over media. What one never gets to hear is what is happening in Jammu, which is very much a part of Jammu and Kashmir and its entire area is disturbed and armed forces, special powers and armies deployed there. Given that, why is it that it's always silent on Hindutva radicalization that has taken place? And we have witnessed it in the last few years as your own writings vouch for it. I have not said so. In fact, it is the other way around. I've even said that how is it that when Article 370 was there, 4,000 Rohingyas have been settled in Jammu. How is it that when the IB is saying that the Rohingyas were involved in the Sunjwan military camp attacked by Jem terrorists, how is it that no action has been taken against it? How is it that a chap like Yasin Malik... Why? Why? Why no action has been taken? That is politics. Don't ask me. No, but tell me, this is a disturbed area. Can we also give you more examples? No, I'm saying this is for 30 years this has been a disturbed area. An army has been called in. There is central paramilitary forces deployed there. It's now under precedence rule after having experienced six months of governance rule. Why, despite all that and complete control now by the center, why is it that none of these, any action is being taken? As you yourself point out that these are serious issues, why is it that nothing is being done? I mean, what politics is there? Two reasons, now let me talk. First is that in all these areas, population is the center of gravity. That is one, which is not being tackled. It is not a military solution, it is a political solution, right? Second, most important, and I've written about this, do we have the political will at the center and the concerned states to finish this problem in JNK, in Nuxlite area, northeast? In my perception, no. Nobody is interested. Who are the people dying? Is the security forces dying? Who are the civilians getting killed? They are the riffraff. Is any politician or bureaucrat who is surrounded by layers of security being attacked? No. It's a game that is being played and I've written that number of times. Nobody has the will to finish the insurgents. When you say, I mean, I granted this point that there has been no political solution which is delayed, therefore, and prolong the stay of the army in these areas because these finally at the end of the day, as you yourself went out, it requires a political solution so that it ends and there is a closure brought to it. But there is something, the civilian riffraff that you talk about, what do you mean by that? Civilian riffraffs versus the soldiers dying. I am saying the mango people like me, I am getting killed. No bureaucrat politician is getting killed. They are surrounded by layers of security. You tell me in JNK today, if there is a problem of unemployment, there is a problem of unemployment in the rest of India also. Why is it that the government doesn't come out? Okay, this is the employment plan which we can create, provided you lay down the gun. Are we interested? Nobody has done that. Nobody has reached out to the people. And of course, when... Which is what has prolonged the stay of the involvement and the continuation of the... because there is no political closure to this. No, because there is no political will to close the case. There is no political will to close the case. Neither at the centre nor at the same as with Nuxlite areas. You know, Chidambaram said in 2010, in three years Nuxlite problem will be over. So did now Rajnath Singh. Rajnath Singh, right? His latest statement is that... And you read the article by RSN Singh in Indian Defence Review. The things actually gone worse. No, he himself admitted that it will take another two, three years. So that keeps on getting prolonged because there is... they don't see beyond military solution. They are probably banking on the military to crush it. Whereas, as you yourself point out that beyond the point, it has to be a political solution. Of course. The military can keep the level of violence to a particular level. Even Jail V.K. Singh, if you remember when he was the chief, he said so. He said the politicians are not optimised. What the military has done. And then Farooq Abdullah jumped the roof saying that... No, but that's a very interesting point you've made because this is precisely also what the Supreme Court in 2016 observed. That the prolonged use of military forces is actually a blot in our democracy. Because it means they said either the military is not able to bring about normalcy because and therefore it has failed. Or the civilian and the politicians therefore have failed not to make use of opportunities provided by the military through their operations. I would like to qualify it even further. You see, there's always talk of armed forces special powers act. Nobody, nobody talked of the disturbed area act. It is first the areas declared disturbed area and then the armies brought in. Army can't be functionally like the police. Otherwise, might as well use the police which is equal number today as the army. If you want the armed forces special powers act to be removed, you remove the disturbed area act, army will go back to the border. Can you manage that? Neither the politicians nor the bureaucrats have the guts because they will be lynched by the public. General Katoch, I think I'd like to end this interview because what you've said is the very important point you have drawn attention to that while we talk about AFSPA, unless the root cause is addressed, the disturbed area, if there was no disturbed area declared, army would not be called in, which is to say, if there was a political resolution of the problem before it gravitates to this or reaches this stage where the army has to be called in, before that it must be resolved. Or after the armies called in, they are able to restore order. That's the time the political opportunity should be seized and a solution worked out. Restoring order again is a very loose term. As I said, order can be restored by keeping the violence at a particular level. Army cannot restore the situation. No, bring about, yeah, political solution has to be brought about in the politicians. So have we made any progress towards removing the disturbed area act? No, we are very happy with the 240 terrorist killed and surgical strikes and whatnot. Have we done anything to progress for removing the disturbed area act? No. What has, which government done anything about it? No, I think that's a very important point because if we see, and this is the note we'd like to end today, but we'll return and have General Katoch, left in General Katoch with us again to discuss because these issues are not going to go away very soon and we'll need someone like you to explain to our viewers from time to time what is happening on the ground and what is the armed forces own perception of the events. Thank you for watching NewsClick. If you have any feedback, do get back to us.