Former Air Chief Dhanoa’s Assertion on Regime Change Operations

In March 2024, former Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa emphasized that successful regime change operations require the synchronized use of air power and ground troops. Speaking at a defence seminar in New Delhi, Dhanoa highlighted that air power alone cannot secure sustainable political control without the physical presence and consolidation by ground forces. His remarks align with evolving military doctrines advocating jointness for strategic dominance and operational flexibility in complex conflict scenarios.

Legal and Constitutional Framework Governing Military Operations in India

Regime change, as a use of force in international relations, is regulated by the United Nations Charter (1945), particularly Article 2(4) which prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. India’s military conduct is governed domestically by the Army Act, 1950, Air Force Act, 1950, and Navy Act, 1957, which regulate deployment and engagement rules.

The Defence of India Act, 1962 grants emergency powers to the government during conflict situations. Further, Article 352 of the Indian Constitution empowers the President to proclaim a national emergency, enabling the armed forces to undertake operations including those aimed at regime stabilization or change within or outside the country, subject to parliamentary approval.

Economic Dimensions of Air-Ground Integration in Defence

India’s defence budget for 2023-24 is ₹5.94 lakh crore (~USD 72 billion), with the Indian Air Force (IAF) allocated approximately 15% (~₹89,000 crore). This includes the ₹59,000 crore acquisition of 36 Rafale fighter jets, underscoring the prioritization of advanced air capabilities. Ground forces modernization, including infantry and mechanized units, consumes nearly 40% of the budget.

• Synergistic air-ground operations influence procurement, emphasizing interoperability and joint systems.
• Domestic defence manufacturing aims for a $25 billion market by 2025, driven by 'Make in India' initiatives targeting indigenous air and ground platforms.
• Reduced defence imports by 33% from 2016 to 2023 reflect this shift towards self-reliance.

Key Institutions and Their Roles in Regime Change Operations

The Indian Air Force commands aerial warfare and air support in joint operations, maintaining a fleet strength of approximately 33 squadrons against a sanctioned 42 (IAF data, 2023). The Indian Army executes ground operations, including territorial control and regime stabilization, deploying 20,000-50,000 personnel in counter-insurgency and regime change missions (MoD reports, 2022).

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) formulates defence policy and oversees force readiness. The Integrated Defence Staff (IDS) coordinates joint operations among the Army, Navy, and Air Force but lacks full operational command authority, a structural limitation affecting campaign efficiency. Internationally, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) legitimizes or restricts regime change through mandates under international law.

Operational Data Supporting Air-Ground Integration

• Joint air strikes increase mission success rates by 30-40% compared to ground-only operations (RAND Corporation, 2021).
• Exercises like Yudh Abhyas with the US have improved air-ground interoperability by 25% over five years (MoD press releases).
• The induction of BrahMos-A missiles has enhanced IAF’s precision strike capability, reducing target engagement time by 40% (DRDO Annual Report, 2023).

Comparative Analysis: Indian Doctrine Versus US AirLand Battle Doctrine

The US military’s AirLand Battle doctrine, developed in the 1980s, exemplifies integrated air-ground warfare. During the 1991 Gulf War, coalition air strikes destroyed 88% of Iraqi command and control infrastructure within 72 hours, enabling rapid ground advances and regime collapse (US DoD, 1992). This contrasts with India’s still evolving joint operational command structure, which lacks a fully empowered Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) with direct operational authority over integrated campaigns.

Structural Gaps in India’s Joint Operations

The absence of a fully empowered CDS with operational command authority over integrated air-ground campaigns leads to coordination delays and suboptimal resource utilization. This structural gap undermines the rapid decision-making essential for regime change operations, where timing and seamless integration of air strikes with ground maneuvers determine success.

Further, the lack of unified doctrines and real-time intelligence sharing between services restricts operational flexibility. India’s current model relies heavily on coordination rather than command unity, which contrasts with global best practices.

Significance and Way Forward

• Empowering the CDS with operational command over joint campaigns will enhance coordination and resource optimization.
• Institutionalizing joint doctrines that integrate air power with ground operations will improve mission success rates.
• Investing in indigenous precision strike and surveillance technologies will reduce dependence on imports and increase operational autonomy.
• Expanding joint exercises with global partners will further improve interoperability and tactical innovation.
• Legal frameworks must be periodically reviewed to ensure compliance with international law while maintaining operational readiness for regime change scenarios.