India’s journey towards Theaterisation, a strategic restructuring of the armed forces under unified commands, is a critical reform that has long been overdue. However, it is crucial to be mindful that if this transition is mishandled, rushed, or driven by inter-service rivalry, it could result in disjointed outcomes that undermine rather than strengthen national security. This awareness is essential for successfully navigating the reform process.
Lt Gen Anil Ahuja (Retd), PVSM, UYSM, VSM, provides a timely and practical perspective. His warning is clear: if the services keep their current acrimonious debate, we risk paving the way for an ‘unprofessional’ decision, one that could be imposed from the top and leave us working with a structure we didn’t shape, don’t fully understand, and may not be operationally ready for. This ‘acrimonious debate’ refers to the competition and conflicts that can occur between different branches of the military, such as the Army, Navy, and Air Force, over resources, strategies, and priorities.
The key message? Integration must come before Theaterisation. Without a solid foundation in planning, doctrine, capabilities, command, and control, any reorganisation into theatre commands will be superficial rather than functional.
Integration: The Real Starting Point
Before restructuring commands, we first need to align our thinking, planning, and operations. While Theaterisation focuses on structure, integration is about creating synergy. That synergy is still missing.
The Indian Armed Forces have achieved notable progress in recent years. Advances in joint logistics, some air defence coordination, and improved interoperability are positive steps. However, these remain isolated successes rather than part of a unified, comprehensive framework. Integration should become the default mode of operation, not an exception.
We need to move from isolated silos to connected systems. This doesn’t demand new commands or HQs immediately. Instead, it requires a willingness to abandon service-centric turf wars and embrace a mission-first, capability-focused mindset.
Formalise Joint Operational Plans—Now
The idea that theatre commands must come before joint operations is flawed. We can and must begin with integrated, multi-domain operations plans that are agreed upon by the Army, Navy, and Air Force.
This step is crucial and cannot be skipped. No amount of restructuring can compensate for the lack of a unified warfighting doctrine. Before dismantling existing command hierarchies, let’s agree on what we are preparing for and how we plan to fight. The Raksha Mantri recently issued a doctrine on Multi-Domain Operations.
A formalised joint planning structure, reviewed and refined across services, will foster mutual understanding, reduce operational friction, and serve as the foundation for future command redesign.
Get Real on Threat Scenarios
No military reform is complete without clarity on the types of conflict we are preparing for: high-intensity warfare across multiple domains, short and sharp border conflicts, grey-zone operations, or maritime dominance in the Indo-Pacific.
Each conflict type requires different force structures, doctrines, and resource allocations. Without clarity on the probable conflict spectrum, Theaterisation turns into an abstract administrative task.
We must define India’s most probable and most dangerous threats. Once identified, these scenarios should inform everything from the structuring of theatre commands to procurement priorities and command control protocols.
This clarity will not only guide integration and theatre design but also enhance deterrence by making our military intent and posture unambiguous.
Joint Capability Building Needs More Than Regular Budgets
Talk of integration and joint commands sounds empty without realistic, prioritised, and funded capability development plans. Too often, the debate focuses on organisational charts, neglecting whether the forces under these new commands will have the necessary tools.
Key enablers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), cyber, space, and national-level air defence, are not plug-and-play. They require significant investments, long lead times, and inter-ministerial cooperation. These are not capabilities that can be developed within the current defence budget allocations. Dedicated funding, approved at the national level, is essential.
We need to shift from budget-based planning to capability-based budgeting. Integration will stay incomplete unless we collectively present a prioritised wish list to the government, supported by a shared vision rather than individual service agendas. This common vision will guarantee that all efforts focus on a single goal.
Command and Control: Address the Elephant in the Room
Command and control (C2) is the backbone of any operational structure. In the current discourse on Theaterisation, this issue has received surprisingly little attention. The question is simple: who will command the Theatre Commanders?
Theoretically, the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) should be the top operational authority. However, as Gen Ahuja points out, the current Integrated Defence Staff (IDS) lacks the operational structure, institutional authority, and digital infrastructure to perform this role effectively.
If we centralise command at the CDS level without first developing the needed capabilities in IDS, we risk failure. We must urgently and realistically close this capability gap.
Establishing C2 clarity is more than a bureaucratic matter. It impacts everything from combat readiness to inter-service trust to political oversight.
War Game First, Then Build
Theatre commands are not checkboxes. They are complex operational ecosystems. They must be conceptualised, built, tested, and refined iteratively.
Let’s avoid starting with full-scale restructuring. Instead, begin by designing conceptual organisational structures for Theatre Command HQs and their subordinate units. Then, test them through war games. Conduct simulations, Red Team exercises, and stress scenarios. Use one command as a test bed.
These war games will reveal operational insights, logistical challenges, doctrinal mismatches, and unexpected friction points. It’s better to identify these now than during a crisis.
This process will take at least 2–3 years, but it will be time well spent. Reform is not a race. It is a deliberate effort to get things right the first time. This patience and commitment to a long-term goal are essential for the success of the reform.
Theatres are Crucial for Multi-Domain Operations—But Must Be India-Specific
As warfare advances into multi-domain operations (MDO), simultaneous engagement across land, air, sea, cyber, and space, the need for Theatre Commands becomes more evident. MDO demands unified planning, real-time information sharing, and seamless execution across all domains. Fragmented command structures cannot provide this level of coordination and speed. However, India must avoid unthinkingly copying foreign military models. Our geographic features, threat spectrum, civil-military frameworks, and resource limitations are unique. Theatre design should reflect India’s specific strategic environment, including a two-front challenge, maritime responsibilities, and the necessity for rapid force mobilisation across diverse terrains. Theatres must be tailored for Indian wars, not American ones, not Chinese ones. Let doctrine determine structure, not imitation.
Reality Check: 56 of 196 Steps Completed
According to journalist Ajay Banerjee of The Tribune, only 56 of the 196 procedural steps toward Theaterisation have been completed. That’s less than 30%.
This statistic highlights a broader truth: genuine reform demands persistence, consensus, and clear political guidance. Rushing into theatre creation without laying the proper groundwork risks building hollow structures with limited operational usefulness.
Furthermore, the current pace shows that the services are still not aligned. The longer this disagreement persists, the more likely it is that an ill-informed, externally imposed solution will arise, one that fails to satisfy either military logic or operational readiness.
Conclusion: Make the First Genuine Move
It’s time for the services to stop viewing Theaterisation as a zero-sum game. No service is being diminished. Integration doesn’t mean losing identity; it means enhancing collective capability.
This is not a competition. It is a collective effort to safeguard India’s strategic future.
The dictum of “how far can I plan now,” as echoed by Gen Ahuja, should guide us. We might not see the entire path to the theatre today, but that is no reason to stand still.
Let’s take the real, practical steps now: –
- Finalise joint operational plans
- Define conflict scenarios
- Agree on capability development priorities
- Secure funding for critical enablers
- Clarify command and control structures
- War game proposed theatres
- Test, refine, and iterate
Let integration lead the way. Let professionalism silence parochialism. Let us build a force that is not just jointly structured but jointly effective.
India deserves nothing less.