Modi's India: A Paper Elephant?

[Riaz Haq]

"Desh ka bahut nuksaan hua hai", acknowledged Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi after his military's recent failures against Pakistan in Balakot and Kashmir. This marked a major shift in Modi's belligerent tone that has been characterized by his boasts of "chhappan inch ki chhati" (56 inch chest) and  talk of  "munh tor jawab" (jaw-breaking response) and "boli nahin goli" (bullets, not talks) to intimidate Pakistan in the last few years.  The recent events are forcing India's western backers to reassess their strategy of boosting India as a counterweight to China.

Balakot and Kashmir:

Indian government and media have made a series of false claims about Balakot "militant casualties" and "shooting down Pakistani F16".  These claims have been scrutinized and debunked by independent journalists, experts and fact checkers. There is no dispute about the fact that Squadron Leader Hasan Siddiqui of Pakistan Air Force (PAF), flying a Pakistan-made JF-17 fighter, shot down Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman of Indian Air Force (IAF) flying a Russia made MiG 21. Abhinandan was captured by Pakistan and then released to India.

Beautiful Balakot, Kaghan Valley, Pakistan

Western Narrative:

The widely accepted western narrative about India and Pakistan goes like this: "India is rapidly rising while Pakistan is collapsing". In a 2015 report from South Asia, Roger Cohen of New York Times summed it up as follows: "India is a democracy and a great power rising. Pakistan is a Muslim homeland that lost half its territory in 1971, bounced back and forth between military and nominally democratic rule, never quite clear of annihilation angst despite its nuclear weapons".

India-Pakistan Military Spending: Infographic Courtesy The Economist

India: A Paper Elephant?

In an article titled "Paper Elephant", the Economist magazine talked about how India has ramped up its military spending and emerged as the world's largest arms importer. "Its military doctrine envisages fighting simultaneous land wars against Pakistan and China while retaining dominance in the Indian Ocean", the article said. It summed up the situation as follows: "India spends a fortune on defense and gets poor value for money".

Pakistan Defense Spending. Source: Jane's Defense

After the India-Pakistan aerial combat over Kashmir, New York Times published a story from its South Asia correspondent headlined: "After India Loses Dogfight to Pakistan, Questions Arise About Its Military".  Here are some excerpts of the report:

"Its (India's) loss of a plane last week to a country (Pakistan) whose military is about half the size and receives a quarter (a sixth according to SIPRI) of the funding is telling. ...India’s armed forces are in alarming shape....It was an inauspicious moment for a military the United States is banking on to help keep an expanding China in check".

India-Pakistan Ratios of Tanks and Soldiers

Ineffective Indian Military:

Academics who have studied Indian military have found that it is ineffective by design. In "Army and Nation: The Military and Indian Democracy Since Independence",  the author Steven I. Wilkinson, Nilekani Professor of India and South Asian Studies and Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at Yale, has argued that the civil-military constraints that have helped prevent a coup have hurt Indian military effectiveness and preparedness in at least three important ways:

(1) the weakening of the army before the 1962 China war;

(2) the problems caused for defense coordination and preparation by unwieldy defense bureaucracy, duplication of functions among different branches and lack of sharing of information across branches and

(3) the general downgrading of pay and perks since independence which has left the army with huge shortage of officers that affected the force's discipline capabilities.

Summary:

India's international perception as a "great power rising" has suffered a serious setback as a result of its recent military failures against Pakistan which spends only a sixth of India's military budget and ranks 17th in the world, far below India ranking 4th by globalfirepower.com.  "Desh ka bahut nuksaan hua hai", acknowledged Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi after his military's recent failures in Balakot and Kashmir. This marked a major shift in Modi's belligerent tone that has been characterized by his boasts of "chhappan inch ki chhati" (56 inch chest) and  talk of  "munh tor jawab" (jaw-breaking response) and "boli nahin goli" (bullets, not talks) to intimidate Pakistan in the last few years.  The recent events are forcing India's western backers to reassess their strategy of boosting India as a counterweight to China.

Here's a discussion on the subject:

https://youtu.be/tEWf-6cT0PM


https://www.youtube.com/embed/tEWf-6cT0PM"; width="560"></iframe>" height="315" src="https://img1.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" width="560" style="cursor: move; background-color: #b2b2b2;" />

Here's Indian Prime Minister Modi making excuses for his military's failures:

https://youtu.be/QIt0EAAr3PU

https://www.youtube.com/embed/QIt0EAAr3PU"; width="560"></iframe>" height="315" src="https://img1.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" width="560" style="cursor: move; background-color: #b2b2b2;" />

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

South Asia Investor Review

China-Pakistan Defense Production Collaboration Irks West

Balakot and Kashmir: Fact Checkers Expose Indian Lies

Is Pakistan Ready for War with India?

Pakistan-Made Airplanes Lead Nation's Defense Exports

Modi's Blunders and Delusions 

India's Israel Envy: What If Modi Attacks Pakistan?

Project Azm: Pakistan to Develop 5th Generation Fighter Jet

Pakistan Navy Modernization

Pakistan's Sea-Based Second Strike Capability

Who Won the 1965 War? India or Pakistan?

Pakistani Military's Performance in 1971 War

[Riaz Haq]

Indian defense analyst Bharat Karnad: "No reason to doubt the Pakistani claim (about India's missile launch) because the Pakistani air defence complex at Sargodha, District Miani, is very advanced and capable of detecting cruise and ballistic missile firings and minutely tracking their trajectory"


https://bharatkarnad.com/2022/03/14/even-if-authorised-missile-firi...

India on Friday said a missile that landed in Pakistan on March 9 was fired ‘accidentally’ due to a technical malfunction. The defence ministry ordered a court of inquiry into the incident a day after Pakistan said a high-speed projectile launched from India entered its airspace and fell near Mian Channu in Khanewal district.

Bharat Karnad, emeritus professor of national security studies at the Centre for Policy Research, the New Delhi think-tank, tells Rediff.com Senior Contributor Rashme Sehgal.

While the defence ministry has explained that the missile fired into Pakistan was due to a ‘technical malfunction’, former naval chief Admiral Arun Prakash has tweeted that these missiles can never be launched accidentally but only when authorised.What does that indicate?

The Admiral is right. This seems like an unauthorised firing. Further, even if authorised, the firing makes no sense, because there was no active warhead. So, what was the aim?

This missile was accidentally fired on March 9, one day before the counting of votes of the assembly elections. Could there be a co-relation between these two events?

No. The co-relation is only in the minds of the conspiracy inclined, and there is no dearth of those in the country.

The missile mishap occurred on March 9, but the government came up with a clarification on March 11. Why this delay?

Well, the government was first waiting for a formal Pakistani protest. And it took another day to craft a diplomatic apology.

What does this say about their safety mechanisms and the technical prowess in the way these dangerous weapons are being maintained in India?

That’s precisely the worry attending on this misfiring.

Indeed, the Pakistani government was quick to capitalise on this incident of the Brahmos missile going astray.

Prime Minister Imran Khan’s National Secrity Adviser Dr Moeed Yusuf publicly expressed concern and asked the international community to note the fairly casual manner in which missiles are operated.by the Indian armed forces.

He went on, understandably, to extend that concern to India’s handling of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems.

Such criticism is bound to have an effect on international opinion and hurt India’s self-confessed status as a ‘responsible State’.

The defence ministry seems to have landed with egg on its face.

A whole barnyard full of eggs, in fact. This is quite shocking and simply cannot be credibly explained away by referring to a ‘technical glitch’.

The triggering mechanism is a hardy piece of work including a firing sequence and a final authorisation.

How this process was obviated is a mystery.

Pakistan’s foreign office summoned India’s charge d’affaires in Islamabad to lodge a warning that this unprovoked violation of its airspace could have endangered passenger flights and civilian lives.

Well, yeah, anything could have happened, including the missile, even with a dummy warhead, kinetically taking out a passenger aircraft.

In your view, could this have been a BrahMos cruise missile possessing nuclear capability?

The Brahmos missile has interchangeable warheads and can carry both conventional and nuclear weapons.

But most forward-deployed Indian cruise missiles are conventionally armed.

If it was a nuclear missile — albeit unarmed — is there a possibility in the future that the command and control system could fail again in the future which could have dangerous consequences for both nations?

Unless the government clarifies the nature of the ‘technical glitch’ everything is in the realm of speculation. That could include a faulty command and control system.

[Riaz Haq]

#India's Size Illusion by Arvind Subramanian. #Indian policymakers should avoid succumbing to the illusion of size, and reconcile themselves with their country's current status as a middling power. #Modi #BJP #Hindutva #Russia #Ukraine #China @ProSyn https://prosyn.org/hNyXBIw

True, India’s economy is undeniably large. According to the International Monetary Fund, India is the world’s third-largest economy in purchasing-power-parity terms, with a GDP of $10 trillion, behind China ($27 trillion) and the United States ($23 trillion). At market exchange rates, its GDP of $3 trillion makes it the sixth-largest economy, behind the US, China, Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom.

But India’s economic size has not translated into commensurate military strength. Part of the problem is simple geography. Bismarck supposedly said that the US is bordered on two sides by weak neighbors and on two sides by fish. India, however, does not enjoy such splendid isolation. Ever since independence, it has been confronted on its Western frontier by Pakistan, a highly armed, chronically hostile, and often military-ruled neighbor.

More recently, India’s northern neighbor, China, also has become aggressive, repudiating the territorial status quo, occupying contested land in the Himalayas, reclaiming territory in the east, and building up a large military presence along India’s borders. So, India may have fish for neighbors along its long peninsular coast, but on land it faces major security challenges on two fronts.

Despite these challenges and its sizable economy, India has struggled to generate adequate military resources. Defense expenditure is notoriously difficult to estimate, especially for China and Pakistan, which have opaque political systems. But annual combined defense spending by India’s two adversaries is likely to be three times the $70-75 billion that India spends. And the effective gap is probably even larger, because India’s politically driven emphasis on military manpower has crowded out spending on military technology. In short, India may have a large economy, but dangerous geography and domestic politics have left it militarily vulnerable.

Then there is the question of market size. As Pennsylvania State University’s Shoumitro Chatterjee and one of us (Subramanian) have shown, India’s middle-class market for consumption is much smaller than the $3 trillion headline GDP number suggests, because many people have limited purchasing power while a smaller number of well-off people tend to save a lot. In fact, the effective size of India’s consumer market is less than $1 trillion, far smaller than China’s and even smaller relative to the potential world export market of nearly $30 trillion.

---------------
India needs to accept, and act in line with, its current status as a middling power. Over time, rapid and sustained economic growth could make India the major power it aspires to be. Until then, it must look past the illusion of size and reconcile itself with strategic realities.

[Riaz Haq]

China ramps up arms exports to Pakistan, aiming to squeeze India
Beijing and Islamabad grow closer with eye on mutual rival

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/China-ramp...

BEIJING/NEW DELHI -- From the sale of stealth fighters to submarines, China is accelerating its defense cooperation with Pakistan in a bid to exert pressure on India, a rival in border disputes with both.

China is believed to want to expand its influence in South Asia while the U.S. and Europe are focused on the war in Ukraine. Beijing "stands ready to provide assistance within its capacity for Pakistan to overcome difficulties and recover its economy," Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in a Tuesday meeting, according to China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Khan expressed hopes for joint achievements and cooperation "in all fields," the ministry said. Ukraine was among the other topics discussed.

China this month delivered six J-10CE fighter jets to Pakistan, the Communist Party-affiliated Global Times has reported. An update to China's homegrown J-10s, they are a key part of the Chinese air force and often fly into Taiwan's air defense identification zone.

The J-10CE is a so-called 4.5-generation fighter, placing it somewhere between the F-15s used widely by Japan and the U.S. and F-35 stealth fighters in terms of capability. The delivered jets later took part in a military parade in Pakistan.

Pakistan this month is also adding 50 new JF-17 fighters, which were developed jointly with China. They do not match the performance of the J-10CE but do come with near-stealth capability.

India recently deployed the Russian S-400 missile defense system with an eye toward Pakistan. China looks to bolster its response to potential Indian air operations through greater cooperation with Pakistan.

China is actively contributing to improvements in Pakistan's navy as well, concerned that the Indian military could wield greater clout in key Indo-Pacific sea lanes. Pakistan in January inducted a Chinese-built Type 054 frigate, which is designed for anti-surface, anti-air and anti-submarine warfare.

"Pakistan is reportedly also planning to purchase from China eight submarines, which Pakistan is positioning as the 'backbone of the Navy,'" Japan's Ministry of Defense said in its 2021 white paper. "Four will be built in China, with the remainder to be built in Pakistan."

Sino-Indian relations have deteriorated since the deadly 2020 border clash in the Himalayas. India also announced a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Olympics at the last minute after a Chinese soldier who had been involved in the fighting was chosen as a torchbearer.

Chinese President Xi Jinping invited Khan to the Olympics' opening ceremony. At a Feb. 6 summit, Xi told Khan that bilateral ties had gained greater strategic significance amid global turbulence and transformation. He expressed firm support for Pakistan's sovereignty -- a likely signal that China stands with Pakistan in the latter's own border dispute with India.

Khan expressed hopes for greater cooperation with China. No force can stop China's advance, he said.

[Riaz Haq]

Should India insist on large warships after sinking of Russia’s Moskva?

Moskva rests at the bottom of the Black Sea and its loss could animate India’s maritime debate involving large naval ships. But the warning sign that must hang over it, is that its relevance to the Indian context can be different.

https://theprint.in/opinion/should-india-insist-on-large-warships-a...

The loss of a key surface naval asset to cruise missiles provides fodder to buttress some arguments in an ongoing global debate within maritime powers. The debate is an offshoot of a larger debate on the survivability of large platforms like aircraft carriers due to their vulnerability to precision-guided munitions like cruise missiles. It is a debate that is particularly relevant to India and one that continues to animate the Indian Navy’s insistence on the continued relevance of the aircraft carrier.

Technological advancements in surveillance capabilities that are networked with missiles based on air, land, and sea platforms have certainly increased the vulnerability of surface naval assets. Accuracy is significantly improved by using a combination of Global Positioning Signals (GPS), laser guidance and inertial navigation systems. Simultaneously, the development of countermeasures also reduces the vulnerability factor. It is a cat-and-mouse game in technology development that mostly tends to favour the attacker over the defender. The obvious route for the attacker is to overwhelm the defender’s ability by firing a large number of missiles simultaneously on the same target. Also, the pace of development and cost of missiles that can penetrate the defender’s missile shield is quicker and cheaper than developing and fielding missile defences.

[Riaz Haq]

The Army in Indian Military Strategy: Rethink Doctrine or Risk Irrelevance
ARZAN TARAPORE

https://carnegieindia.org/2020/08/10/army-in-indian-military-strate...

India’s military strategy has been dominated by an orthodox offensive doctrine—a method of using force that favors large formations tasked with punitive incursions into enemy territory. This doctrine is orthodox in its preference for large combined-arms army formations, usually operating with minimal coordination with other services and relatively autonomously from its political masters. It is offensive in its military aims of imposing a punitive cost on the enemy––usually in the form of capturing territory for the purposes of gaining leverage in postwar negotiations––even if it is usually deployed in the service of a strategically defensive policy of maintaining the territorial status quo. And it is a doctrine in that it represents an enduring set of principles governing the Indian Army’s use of force, regardless of the scarcity of public doctrinal publications.

This paper argues that the stubborn dominance of the orthodox offensive doctrine, even in the face of drastic changes in India’s strategic environment, renders the military a less useful tool of national policy. In the two decades since India fought its last war in and around the district of Kargil in 1999, three major strategic trends have fundamentally changed India’s security environment: nuclear deterrence has made major conventional war unlikely; China’s military power and assertiveness now pose an unprecedented threat; and radical new technologies have redefined the military state of the art. India’s security policy has not kept pace. Given the balance of military power on India’s northern borders, India cannot decisively defeat either Pakistan or China on the battlefield. Without the ability to impose such unacceptable costs, India’s doctrine will not deter its rivals, which both have significant resolve to bear the costs of conflict. The continued pursuit of large, offensive military options also raises the risk that its enemies will rely on escalatory—even nuclear—responses. And because the doctrine demands a force structure of large ground-holding formations, it pulls scarce resources away from modernization and regional force projection—a problem made especially acute as the Indian government makes tough economic choices amid the coronavirus pandemic.

The remainder of this paper is divided into five parts. First, it surveys the history of India’s military strategy, showing its reliance on ground forces and the orthodox offensive doctrine. Second, it outlines the three major strategic changes that have upended India’s security environment in the twenty-first century. Third, it analyzes the reasons why India’s strategy and doctrine have failed to adapt. Fourth, the paper argues that India’s military is less useful in this new environment. Finally, the paper concludes with some recommendations for the Indian Army.

[Riaz Haq]

#Pakistan boosts #defense budget by nearly 6% in PKR to $7.19 billion in FY 2023. Official figure for #military expenditures amounts to about 2.2% of its gross domestic product — a drop from 2.45% of its #GDP compared to the fiscal 2021-2022 time frame.
https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2022/06/10/pakistan...

Though mainly covering salary increases, some of the extra money is earmarked for infrastructure such as the continued development of Jinnah Naval Base in Ormara, the Navy’s main operational base, and a naval air base in Turbat.

Official figures state the 83 billion rupee (U.S. $412 million) increase pushes the defense budget up to nearly 1.45 trillion rupees (U.S. $7.19 billion). That implies the 2021 defense budget was about $7.49 billion.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, a Sweden-based think think, found that Pakistan’s military-related expenditures for 2021 came to $11.3 billion. However, the difference could come down to how the procurement budget is created.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, a Sweden-based think think, found that Pakistan’s military-related expenditures for 2021 came to $11.3 billion (including pensions). However, the difference could come down to how the procurement budget is created.


Amid the ongoing threat of domestic terrorism and the need to maintain a credible deterrent against India, the fate of Pakistan’s economy does not bode well, according to Pakistan expert Claude Rakisits, who teaches at the Australian National University.

“Pakistan’s economic situation is in dire straits. This makes it difficult for the government to buy new hardware or even plan ahead for new acquisitions,” he said.

Brian Cloughley, an analyst and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad, has tracked developments in Pakistan for decades, and he doubts the government’s fiscal approach will be different from previous ones that failed to address underlying issues, including the country’s elite effectively ruling for their own benefit, leading to Pakistan’s cycle of economic woes.


“It is likely, however, that there will be announcement of deferment of expenditure plans for at least some acquisitions, if only to try to convince the [World Bank and International Monetary Fund] that their present, fairly benevolent policy on Pakistan should be maintained,” he said.

But he also believes Pakistan can likely rely on its allies and other friendly nations to carry the load. “The Chinese and the Saudis will probably continue to support Pakistan’s military posture and plans, and the current — most serious — economic crisis will have little effect on the military overall.”

Rakisits agreed that Pakistan might rely on China, although Beijing will likely step in for its own benefit.

“China has a vital interest in ensuring that not only does Pakistan’s economic situation not get worse, which could threaten the overall stability of the country and the viability of its CPEC project, but that it is in a position to maintain its defense capability,” Rakisits said, referring to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is meant to improve infrastructure to strengthen trade between the two countries.

“Accordingly, It’s almost certain that Beijing will assist Pakistan financially in one way or another, especially in light of the West’s increased interest in selling military hardware to India,” he added.

[Riaz Haq]

Sushant Singh
@SushantSin

The motivations for bringing in the short-term contractual recruitment of (Indian) soldiers are financial but its consequences will be borne by the military and the society. Agnipath scheme belies any understanding of soldiering as a profession of honour. My piece in today's
@the_hindu


https://twitter.com/SushantSin/status/1538000288061067264?s=20&...

[Riaz Haq]

Financial motivations
The OROP demand became tricky to fulfil but it was officially instituted in November 2015 for more than 25 lakh defence pensioners.
It came with an immediate annual financial implication of ₹7,123.38 crore and the actual arrears from July 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015 were ₹10,392.35 crore.
The financial burden increased cumulatively over time and has substantially increased the budgetary expenditure on defence pensions.
In the current financial year, ₹1,19,696 crore has been budgeted for pensions, along with another ₹1,63,453 crore for salaries —that is 54% of the allocation for the Defence Ministry.
It has been argued that the savings in the pensions bill — which will show up on the books only after a couple of decades — would be directed towards the modernisation of defence forces.
The armed forces do not have that kind of time available to them to postpone their already long-delayed modernization.
The Indian Air Force is already down to 30 squadrons of fighter jets against the 42 squadrons it needs, and the Indian Navy is at 130 ships when its vision was to be a 200 ship navy; the Indian Army is already short of 1,00,000 soldiers.
The announcement of the Agniveer scheme is an implicit acknowledgement that the Indian the economy is incapable of supporting the armed forces that India needs.
It faces an active military threat from two adversaries, China and Pakistan, and the internal security challenges in Kashmir and the northeastern States.
Hence we must not resort to shrinking the military and rather must expand the economy to support the military and its needs.
Damaging consequences

[Riaz Haq]

The policy has neither been theoretically drafted nor applied as a pilot project which brings uncertainty in its consequences post-implementation.
Delayed consequences might be seen at operational levels of the Military especially the Navy and the Air Force which requires specialization in various areas.
The training infrastructure, administrative working, etc. might be insufficient currently to the handle retention, release and recruitment of huge number of young soldiers.
In the Agnipath pral, the class-based recruitment has been replaced with an all-India all-class recruitment. The reasons for this will strike at the core of the organizational management, leadership structures and operating philosophy of the Indian Army.
Replacing the social identity of the soldiers with a purely professional identity would bring its own challenges in a tradition-bound army.
There will be major problems in training, integrating and deploying soldiers with different levels of experience and motivations.
The criterion of identifying the 25% short-term contracted soldiers to be retained could result in unhealthy competition.
An organisation that depends on trust, camaraderie and esprit de corps could end up grappling with rivalries and jealousies amongst winners and losers, especially in their final year of the contract.
just like the OROP issue, this could become a politically attractive demand for longer tenures and pensions to be picked up by the Opposition parties. Over time, this will lead to the salary and pension budget creeping back up again.
Political, and social implications
The Agnipath scheme also does away with the idea of a State-wise quota for recruitment into the Army, based on the Recruitable Male Population of that State which was implemented from 1966. This prevented an imbalanced army, which was dominated by any one State, linguistic community or ethnicity.
Academic research shows that the high level of ethnic imbalance has been associated with severe problems of democracy and an increased likelihood of civil war.
Coupled with this is the lack of hope in India’s economy, where over 45 crore Indians have stopped looking for jobs, there are
high levels of unemployment and underemployment.
It is to this mix that these few thousand young men who have been trained in inflicting organized violence will be thrown up every year.
From erstwhile Yugoslavia to Rwanda — and closer home, during Partition — there are numerous examples of demobilised soldiers leading to increased violence against minorities.
Way Forward
In India, the Indian Army has so far provided salary, uniform and prestige, an inheritance of the British who took care of the living conditions, facilities for the soldiers’ families, and postretirement benefits and rewards, such as grants of land. A short-term contractual soldier, without earning pension, will be seen as doing jobs after his military service that are not seen to be commensurate in status and prestige with the profession of honour. It will reduce the motivation of those joining on short-term contracts while diminishing the “honour” of a profession which places extraordinary demands on young men. The Government’s yearning for financial savings runs the risk of reducing the honour of a profession, the stability of a society and the safety of a country.

[Riaz Haq]

Thousands ransack #Indian #railway station as #protests intensify over #India’s #military hiring plan. In a bid to contain the outrage, #Modi gov't has announced concessions for those who will serve under the #AgnipathScheme. #BJP #Hindutva #Islamophobia https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/19/thousands-ransack-rai...

Protesters in India’s eastern state of Bihar have damaged public property and ransacked offices in a railway station, expressing outrage at a new military recruitment plan and demanding the government reverse course.

The government of the prime minister, Narendra Modi, has introduced a scheme called Agnipath, or “path of fire”, designed to bring more people into the military on four-year contracts to lower the average age of India’s 1.38 million-strong armed forces.

A top military general, Lieut Gen Anil Puri, told the NDTV news channel that the aim of the plan was to make the military more modern and effective.

Analysts said the new scheme would also help cut burgeoning pension costs, but opponents believe it would limit opportunities for permanent jobs in the defence forces, with implications for salaries, pensions and other benefits.

One person was killed this week and more than a dozen have been injured in a series of protests in some regions of the country against the new scheme.

Thousands of young men attacked train coaches, burned tyres and clashed with officials at a railway station in Bihar, one of India’s poorest states, on Saturday.

Authorities cancelled 369 trains nationwide, many of them running through areas witnessing unrest.

Sanjay Singh, a senior police official overseeing law and order in the state, said at least 12 protesters were arrested and at least four policemen injured in clashes.

“Around 2,000 to 2,500 people entered the Masaurhi railway station and attacked the forces,” he said.

In Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state, police arrested at least 250 people under what are called preventative arrests. Some demonstrators accused the police of using excessive force.

In a bid to contain the outrage, the federal government on Saturday announced concessions for those who will serve under the scheme.

The federal home ministry announced it would reserve 10% of vacancies in the paramilitary forces and Assam Rifles, a unit in the Indian army, for those who have passed out of the army after the four-year period mandated in the scheme.

The defence ministry stated it would reserve 10% of its vacancies for those who have completed the scheme.

“Perhaps because it is a new scheme, people have misunderstood it, but we have been discussing this with everyone, including ex-servicemen,” the defence minister, Rajnath Singh, told a conference on Saturday.

The scheme calls for retaining 25% of the recruited soldiers after four years of service, with the rest getting priority for other jobs, such as with the state police.

The navy chief said on Friday the protests were unexpected and probably the result of misinformation about the new system.

“I didn’t anticipate any protests like this,” Admiral R Hari Kumar told ANI. “It is the single biggest human resource management transformation that has ever happened in the Indian military.”

The scheme is not open for women in combat roles and there are no current plans to change this.