'IAF should remain a single entity': Ex-fighter pilot says military theaterisation is an outdated concept

Military theaterisation is an outdated concept that does not reflect the demands of contemporary warfare, former IAF Group Captain Ajay Ahlawat said on Monday. In an opinion piece for The Print, Ahlawat recalled the mandate behind India's most significant recent defence reform. In February 2020, the Centre created the Department of Military Affairs and the office of the Chief of Defence Staff. One of the key tasks assigned to DMA/CDS, he said, was the creation of joint/theatre commands. "More than five years later, however, we have seen little progress on this front."

The former pilot noted that initial debates over theatreisation were confined to ministries, service headquarters and a handful of experts. "Understandably, building consensus has proven difficult...But since Operation Sindoor, public interest in the functioning of the Indian Armed Forces has surged. This warrants a better understanding of the proposed theaterisation model, and the challenges that have stalled its implementation."

At its core, he explained, theatreisation envisages reorganising the Army, Navy and Air Force into Integrated Theatre Commands (ITCs), each defined by geography and led by a single commander, with the goals of enhancing joint operations, optimising resources and streamlining command structures. Yet, Ahlawat warned, the model misunderstands both the problem and the solution.

"We are seeking a physical integration of forces that operate in fundamentally distinct domains — air, land, sea — with divergent operational needs and substantially different organisational cultures. The proposed 'one size fits all' model of theaterisation is built on an outdated conceptual framework that does not reflect the demands of contemporary warfare," he said. "With its focus on geographic restructuring rather than functional alignment, the model is actually a solution in search of a problem."

Modern conflicts, he argued, have moved beyond rigid regional deployments. The Russia-Ukraine war demonstrated how real-time intelligence, satellite-based communications, drones and long-range precision strikes can offset numerical inferiority, while Israel's Gaza operations and India's own Operation Sindoor underscore a turn toward non-contact, network-enabled warfare. As CDS Gen Anil Chauhan observed, Ahlawat pointed out, future wars are likely to unfold in cyberspace, space and standoff domains rather than along fixed frontiers.

"These data points suggest that the battlefield is being shaped by long-range fires, precision stand-off weapons, near real-time intelligence, space-based capabilities, unmanned systems, and strategic communications. The physical or geographic proximity of assets and commanders has very little role. Agility in decision-making is more important than integration of decision-making."

The proposed ITCs appear more focused on optimising military bureaucracy by aligning commands geographically — for example, a Western Command for Pakistan, a Northern Command for China, and a Maritime Command for the Indian Ocean Region, the former IAF officer said. "While this may streamline administrative processes, it does not necessarily address the core requirement of modern warfare."

To address the challenges of modern warfare, Ahlawat said, armed forces must prioritise functional integration over rigid geographic restructuring. He said the number of geographic commands should be reduced to three: "a Western Command for Pakistan, a Northern Command for China, and a Maritime Command for the Indian Ocean Region."

According to him, the army's resources should be divided into two geographic theatres: West (Pakistan) and North (China), reflecting operational requirements and terrain specialisation. The Navy, he added, should maintain one command (Maritime) and two fleets — Eastern and Western. The responsibility of island territories (Andaman and Nicobar, Lakshadweep) must be taken over by Maritime command.

"The IAF should remain a single, unified entity covering the entire country due to its rapid deployment capabilities and nationwide operational flexibility," he said. "However, it could be subdivided into two functional commands — Air Defence Command and Strike Command. Air Defence assets of other Services must be aligned with IAF's AD command."

Ahlawat suggested that the forces need to establish dedicated tri-Service functional commands for logistics, training, space, unmanned systems, cyberspace, strategic forces and design & development. "These functional commands would foster synergy, reduce costs, and ensure that domain-specific expertise is leveraged effectively."